The sections below contain useful tips for anyone who is preparing a file for review. If you have any further questions, please contact the Academic Affairs office for more information.
NEW Templates: Faculty Advancement Criteria (Promotion and Acceleration Only) - Effective 7/1/2017
For all Promotion and Acceleration files effective 7/1/2017, CAP will require Departmental Promotion and Acceleration standards and criteria. The Academic Affairs office have developed templates, outlining criteria, which Departments may adopt or revise to their own standards.
Reminder: The New (2015) Biography/Bibliography Format must be reflected on ALL Academic Files Effective 7/1/2017
Files effective 7/1/2017 or have an effective date during the 2016-2017 Academic Review year are required to use the new (as of 2015) Biography/Bibliography Format.
+ Expand All
- Use the correct and most current summary form found on the APO website.
- New appointments/change in series can be found here.
- School of Medicine's Merits/reappointments/appraisals can be found here.
- Skaggs School of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences Merits/reappointments/appraisal form can be found here.
- Confirm that both MD and PhD information is included whenever applicable.
- Use the appropriate salary scale for present and proposed salary rates.
- Make sure the current salary rate is listed and that the current appointment information is accurately reflected. For example, if the person is currently on an MSP contract, indicate that as follows: HS Assistant Clinical Professor (NS)/MSP
- Verify that the correct title code is indicated.
- Use "Tenured" and "Indefinite" end dates as appropriate for the specific rank and series of appointment.
- Check 'Reappointment' for the review files that have an end date.
- Ensure that the votes add up to the total number of eligible voting members when appropriate and make sure the votes match the Chair’s letter.
- If the candidate has no prior UC academic experience, please state "None" or "No prior UC experience."
- Indicate any joint or concurrent appointments, properly annotating the primary or home department as "(1)" and the secondary one as "(2)."
- Verify that the Summary form and Chair’s letter accurately reflect the same proposed action.
- Compare the History page to the past ones to ensure that the information is the same and correct. Make sure the UC Employment on the Biography matches the History page.
- Make sure that all of the percent of effort is accurately reflected. If there was a temporary reduction in time for a certain period of time since the last review, indicate that on the History page as a separate entry.
- Indicate all periods of leave, with or without pay, and clearly indicate the leave as sabbatical, childbearing, parental, medical, etc., whenever appropriate.
- Address the letter to the appropriate person.
- Indicate an end date, if appropriate.
- Address research, clinical, teaching, and service contributions as appropriate to the rank and series of appointment. Also, be sure to address any deficiencies with an explanation of what actions have been taken to rectify them in the future.
- Make sure that all new faculty appointment letters include a statement regarding the recruitment process, a defined teaching plan, and proper justification for the proposed rank, series, and step. If the candidate has never formally taught or is coming from a non-academic field and no teaching evaluations were obtained, please state so and include a few statements that address their teaching/speaking abilities or teaching potential.
- Ensure that any candidate activity mentioned in the department letter is consistent with the information provided in the supporting documents of the file (i.e., teaching evaluations, biography, bibliography, etc.).
- If a vote was taken, state the results and include a reason for any negative or abstaining votes. If no reasons were given, please state so. Also, give an explanation if the department’s vote was different than the ad hoc committee’s recommendation or if appropriate, the division’s vote.
- If referee letters were obtained, briefly state the overall sentiment of their support for the proposed action. Do not disclose the identity of the referees or make any references that could identify who they are. Address any negative statements made or if a referee letter is not in support of the proposed action. Also, make sure to explain if the proposed appointment is different from the one originally solicited. If non-independent referees were used, justify why those letters should be taken into consideration in support of the proposed action. Please remember not to quote from referee letters.
- If the Chair is a collaborator or mentor of the candidate, they must recuse themselves from the process and appoint another senior faculty member who is independent of the candidate to write the department letter or if applicable, the Vice Chair should write it.
- If the candidate’s salary rate has an off-scale component, please state whether it should be maintained, reset, or tapered with the appropriate justification.
- Certification A should always be signed and dated before the departmental vote, which is normally after the file has been assembled at the beginning of the review process or after the departmental ad hoc review.
- Certification B should always be signed and dated after notification of the departmental recommendation when the candidate has had a chance to review the final non-confidential materials being submitted for official "campus" review (i.e., after the Chair’s letter).
- Certification B will always be dated after Certification A.
- Please refer to Appendix E on page 45 of the APO Class Manual at the following link for more specific details
- Verify that any candidate activity mentioned in these letters is consistent with the information provided in the supporting documents of the file (i.e., teaching evaluations, biography, bibliography, etc.).
- 2. Make sure that departmental ad hoc chairs are not co-authors, mentors, or collaborators of the candidate. However, they can serve as a member of the ad hoc committee if their expertise is required. If the most suitable candidate for an ad hoc committee chair is a collaborator, please include a statement in the ad hoc report noting the conflict and explaining why the ad hoc chair was chosen.
- Personal Statement: A recap of the candidate’s accomplishments in clinical, teaching, scholarly, and professional service activities during the review period (depending on series). The statement should include information related to the candidate’s professional activities within the University and their professional community.
- Division Letter: Addresses the candidate’s accomplishments in clinical, teaching, scholarly, and professional service activities during the review period (depending on series). The letter should assess the candidate’s qualifications and make a recommendation to the department Chair.
- Ad Hoc Letter: Addresses the candidate’s accomplishments in clinical, teaching, scholarly, and professional service activities during the review period (depending on series). The letter should assess the candidate’s qualifications and make a recommendation to the department Chair. Departmental Ad Hoc Chair’s should not be co-authors, mentors, or collaborators of the candidate.
- Use the correct verbiage in solicitation letters, ensuring that the appropriate template is used for the proposed appointment/action. For appointments, please refer to the template solicitation letters found on here. For review files, template letters can be found here.
- Clearly indicate which referees were sent the solicitation letter or that the same letter was sent to all referees, whenever appropriate.
- Solicitation Letter: Includes candidate’s name, proposed series and rank, and department. The solicitation letter should list all the referees who received the letter, and should also include the confidentiality statement block at the bottom of the letter.
- Properly indicate the referee’s correct title and institution. If the referee has two or more titles and institution affiliations, please indicate so. If the referee is from UCSD, please indicate the department as well.
- Make sure that the referees used are at a more senior level or higher rank than the candidate’s proposed appointment, and that they are not collaborators within the last 5 years or mentors of the candidate.
- Confirm that at least 2/3's of the referees solicited are selected by the department.
- Correctly mark the 'Responded' or 'Did Not Respond' box.
- Ensure that the correct alpha-letters correspond with the alpha-letter indicated in the upper right-hand corner of each page of the referee letters.
- Indicate if the referee is not independent of the candidate and justify why that referee or letter should be considered.
- Indicate both the course number and course title.
- Make sure all fields are completely filled out for each entry (i.e., the number of students and hours for each course taught).
- Teaching evaluations should be included for the majority of courses taught or activity listed on the case load form.
- The case load form should reflect any teaching evaluation included with the file.
- Teaching evaluations and forms should only be from the current period of review (i.e., 7/1/04 – 6/30/06).
- Make sure that teaching evaluations indicate who the evaluations are from (i.e., residents, postdocs, etc.) and the dates are mentioned, (i.e., Spring, Fall, 7-1-XX – 10-30-XX).
For all Academic Review files with actions effective July 1, 2016, the Committee of Academic Personnel (CAP) requires all candidates to restructure their Biographies/Bibliographies in one of two ways as outlined in the implementation guidelines and new Biography/Bibliography form found below.
- The first page of the biography is now referred to as the “UCSD Academic Personal Data” form. For the 2015-2016 review year, Health Sciences Departments are permitted to submit files with the "UCSD Academic Personal Data" form in all files.
- However, for the 2016-2017 review year, the "UCSD Academic Personal Data" may only be used in Appointment files. Review files, effective July 1, 2017 should omit this first page.
- The Biography must be accurately filled out in chronological order, including UC Education and Employment.
- Activities listed under “Other Activities” should be applicable to Professional Public Service.
- The Candidate is recommended to identify all new activities by inserting a horizontal line in each Biography subsection and listing all new entries under each line.
- The bibliographic list of publications and creative works must be numbered and listed in chronologically ordered (oldest at the top, newest at the bottom), clearly identified subsections.
- Each publication must be listed in the correct subsection. Examples of the Recommended Subsections can be found in the AP website listed above or here.
- Sections A and B may only have publications that have been “Published”, are “In Press”, or “Accepted” prior to October 15 of the current academic year.
- Use of Section C is discouraged except for the Appraisal files of Assistant rank faculty.
- A solid, horizontal line must be used to indicate new publications since the previous advancement, while a dotted line may be used to indicate citations that were used in a review but did not result in advancement.
- Citations of the published work submitted in the Dropbox link with the file must be marked with asterisks.
- A live Dropbox hyperlink must be included at the end of bibliographies of files being submitted for Committee Review. Dropbox links are not required for non-Delegated Authority entry level appointment files, and Tier I Normal Merits and No Changes (unless the publications will be beneficial for the review).
- Make sure that the correct corresponding number on the bibliography is indicated in the upper right-hand corner of each reprint.
- Recommended- A copy of the manuscript plus the acceptance letter should be included for citations listed as "Accepted."
- Recommended- A manuscript should be included for each citation listed in Section C.
- Recommended- A copy of the book cover and title page should be included for all book chapters.
- A copy of the book should be included if the faculty member is the Editor.
- Include this list for all career reviews for Ladder, In Residence, Adjunct (salaried), and Research series (i.e., promotions and advancements to Step VI or Above Scale).
- Make sure a reprint is submitted for each citation listed.
- Five Most Significant Publications: A separate list of five publications selected by the candidate. The candidate should describe their role, the significance of these publications, and their personal impact on the piece, as well as to the rest of the scientific community.
If the candidate took a Sabbatical Leave during the review period. include a copy of the Sabbatical Report submitted upon their return. This is placed after the biography and bibliography.
- Make sure one copy of the approved AA Compliance Report or Waiver form is included with all new appointment files, including those required for certain change in series.
- Make sure the file is in the correct order. Refer to the Checklists at the right of this page for acceptable file order.
- Allow ample time to account for joint departments to complete their portion of the file. Make sure to work with the department contact to ensure timely submission of the file.
- Certification B should be signed and dated after both Chair’s letters to indicate that the candidate is aware of materials submitted by both departments.
- If joint affiliation will not be maintained, please send the appropriate documentation to the Dean’s Office.
For general information on Academic Personnel procedures, forms, and examples, please consult the following: Appointment and Review Procedures and Forms and Examples.