Section II.3

FACULTY ADOPTED POLICIES

EVALUATION OF ADMINISTRATORS

Propposed by the Policy and Development Committee April 27, 1988
Adopted by the Faculty November 10, 1988
Revised by the Faculty November 7, 2002
Revised February 25, 2020

Downloadable PDF

INTRODUCTION

The University Statutes require periodic evaluation of various administrators including departmental chief executive officers, school directors, and college deans. The relevant sections of the Statutes are Article III, Sections 3.b. and 5.b. concerning the dean and school directors, and Article IV, Section 2.a. and 3.a. concerning chairpersons and heads. As noted in Provost Communication #24, " The University of Illinois Statutes mandates the review of unit Deans and Directors at least every five years (see Article III, Sections 3 & 5)." Thus, the following policy corresponds to the directive in this Provost Communication, and also includes guidelines for executive officers specifically indicated by the Statutes, as well as center and program directors of units who also serve an Executive Officer function.

The objectives of the evaluation are (1) to evoke constructive commentary about the administration of the unit; (2) to assess administrative effectiveness in such areas as overall performance, methods and style; (3) to provide the administrator being reviewed with useful information concerning working relationships and expectations within the unit; and (4) to provide useful and trustworthy commentary to the next organizational level. The evaluation is conducted by an ad hoc evaluation committee that submits a report and recommendations to the reviewed administrator's immediate superior regarding the administrator's continuance. The officers within the College subject to this evaluation are the following:

  1. Department Chairs and Heads, Center or Program Directors, and any Executive Officers of similar units
  2. Director of a School
  3. Dean of the College

I. Evaluation and Reappointment of Heads, Chairs, Center or Program Directors, and any Executive Officers of similar units

A. Evaluation of Executive Officers

  1. An evaluation of the administrative work of a chair, head, center or program director, or executive officer of a similar unit, shall be conducted in the fifth year of their term, unless the individual has submitted a resignation effective the following year. This evaluation may be conducted earlier than the fifth year of administrative tenure, if a majority of the voting faculty as specified in the unit’s bylaws present a request for an early evaluation to the Dean, and if the Dean decides that sufficient reason exists for such an evaluation. For departments with Chairs, Heads, or Center or Program Directors that are within schools, such a request will be transmitted through the School Director and will be accompanied by the School Director's recommendation.
  2. The evaluation will be conducted by an ad hoc committee selected in the manner outlined below.
    1. Only voting members of the faculty in the unit will be eligible to serve on the evaluation committee.
    2. The evaluation committee, normally consisting of 3-5 individuals, will be elected from and by the voting faculty of the academic unit.
    3. For units at this level that have none or few of their own budgeted faculty (e.g., museums, centers, or interdisciplinary units), the executive committee or advisory committee of the unit will provide the Dean with a list of faculty members who are affiliated with that unit. In units that do not have an executive or advisory committee, the executive officer will provide the Dean with such a list. The Dean will determine who is eligible to vote for evaluation committee members or to be elected as a member, and an evaluation committee, normally consisting of 3-5 individuals, will be elected by and from that group. The executive officer being evaluated shall not vote. If an appropriate electorate cannot be identified, the Dean, in consultation with the unit, will appoint an evaluation committee.
    4. Neither associate nor assistant chairs or heads of a unit, nor assistant directors of a program or center, shall be eligible to serve on committees evaluating the performance of the executive officer of that unit 
  3. The chair of the evaluation committee will be selected in accordance with the following procedures:
    1. The Dean of the College, in consultation with the Executive Committee of the College, will submit a list of three candidates for chair from outside the unit. From these candidates, the faculty of the unit will elect one as chair of the evaluation committee.
    2. No executive officer of a unit at the departmental, school, or college level will be eligible for this function.
    3. The chair will be a voting member of the committee.
  4. The committee will collect information, and assure its confidential treatment, from the unit's faculty concerning their assessment of the executive officer's performance. Written commentary will be invited, usually in the form of letters, although at the discretion of the committee a questionnaire can be submitted to all faculty and staff of the unit; an opportunity should also be provided to faculty and staff members who wish to meet with the committee or one of its members to provide oral commentary. Such inquiry should include attention to academic leadership, stewardship, administrative skill, diversity and inclusion, and the maintenance of a climate that adheres to principles of transparency and shared governance, such as those outlined in Provost Communication #27. When appropriate, the committee may extend its data collection to knowledgeable individuals outside the unit under examination.
  5. The evaluation committee shall invite the assistance, in units with graduate programs, of a graduate student representative selected by the evaluation committee from a list of three nominations presented from among and by the graduate students in the unit. The evaluation committee will prepare the charge to the graduate student representative and will determine the form of their participation. The student representative's input shall be taken into account by the evaluation committee and shall be summarized in the following report. At the discretion of the evaluation committee, undergraduate opinion may be solicited; even if no such opinion is solicited, the experiences of undergraduates in the unit should be considered as they bear on the administrative performance of the executive officer. The advice of specialized faculty, academic professionals, and staff may be solicited as deemed appropriate by the evaluation committee.
  6. The committee's report should address the Executive Officer's effectiveness and stewardship; should include a recommendation about continuance; and should be submitted in writing to the Office of the Dean. Once the Dean has made a decision concerning continuance, that decision and the supporting rationale will be communicated to the unit and to the Executive Officer.

B. Reappointment

The Head of a department is appointed without specified term (see Statutes, Article IV, Section 3a), as are Center and Program Directors. Chairs are appointed annually (see Statutes, Article IV, Section 2a). Before making any recommendation to the Provost on the annual reappointment of the Chair of a department, the Dean shall consult the Executive Committee of the department, and the Director of any school containing the department.

II. Evaluation and Reappointment of School Directors

A. Evaluation of School Directors

  1. An evaluation of the administrative work of a School Director shall be conducted in the fifth year of their term, unless the individual has submitted a resignation effective the following year. This evaluation may be conducted earlier than the fifth year of administrative tenure, if a majority of the voting faculty as defined by the School’s bylaws present a request for an early evaluation to the Dean, and if the Dean decides that sufficient reason exists for such an evaluation.
  2. The evaluation will be conducted by an ad hoc committee selected in the manner outlined below.
    1. Only voting members of the faculty in the unit will be eligible to serve on the evaluation committee.
    2. The evaluation committee will consist of one representative from each department within the school, excluding executive officers, elected from and by the faculty of that unit.
  3. The chair of the evaluation committee will be selected in accordance with the following procedures:
    1. The Dean of the College, in consultation with the Executive Committee of the College, will submit a list of three candidates from outside the School. From these candidates, the faculty of the School will elect one as chair of the evaluation committee
    2. No executive officer of a unit at the departmental, school, or college level will be eligible for this function.
    3. The chair will be a voting member of the committee.
  4. The committee will collect information, and assure its confidential treatment, from the School's faculty concerning their assessment of the Director's performance. Written commentary will be invited, usually in the form of letters, although at the discretion of the committee a questionnaire can be submitted to all faculty and staff of the School; an opportunity should also be provided to faculty and staff members who wish to meet with the committee or one of its members to provide oral commentary. Such inquiry should include attention to academic leadership, stewardship, administrative skill, diversity and inclusion, and the maintenance of a climate that adheres to principles of transparency and shared governance, such as those outlined in Provost Communication #27. When appropriate, the committee may extend its data collection to knowledgeable individuals outside the unit under examination.
  5. The committee's report should address the Director's effectiveness and stewardship; should include a recommendation about continuance; and should be submitted in writing to the Office of the Dean. Once the Dean has made a decision concerning continuance, that decision and the supporting rationale will be communicated to the unit and to the Director.

B. Reappointment

Before making any recommendation to the Provost on the annual reappointment of the Director of a school, the Dean shall consult the Executive Committee of the school.

III. Evaluation and Reappointment of the Dean of the College

A. Evaluation of the Dean

  1. An evaluation of the administrative work of the Dean of the College shall be conducted in the fifth year of their term, unless the individual has submitted a resignation effective the following year. This evaluation may also be conducted earlier than the fifth year of administrative tenure, if the Executive Committee should endorse and present to the Provost a request by faculty in the College as presented to the Vice Chair of the Executive Committee for an early evaluation, and if the Provost decides that sufficient reason exists for such an evaluation.
  2. The evaluation committee will be elected from among and by the Faculty of the College with one representative selected from each electoral grouping within the College. Candidates may be nominated by a petition signed by eight members of the Faculty of the College and addressed to the Secretary of the Faculty who shall conduct the election. If at least two candidates from each electoral group are not produced by the nomination process, the faculty members of the College's Committee on Committees will complete the slate.
  3. The chair of the evaluation committee should normally be a faculty member holding the rank of full professor and whose primary appointment is in a different College, and who is normally serving as Dean of another college on campus. The chair is appointed by the Provost.
  4. The committee will collect information, and assure its confidential treatment, from the College faculty concerning their assessment of the Dean's performance. Written commentary will be invited, usually in the form of letters, although at the discretion of the committee a questionnaire can be submitted to all faculty of the College; an opportunity should also be provided to faculty members who wish to meet with the committee or one of its members to provide oral commentary. Such inquiry should include attention to academic leadership, stewardship, administrative skill, diversity and inclusion, and the maintenance of a climate that adheres to principles of transparency and shared governance, such as those outlined in Provost Communication #27. When appropriate, the committee may extend its data collection to knowledgeable individuals outside the College.
  5. The committee's report should address the Dean's effectiveness and stewardship; should include a recommendation about continuance; and should be submitted in writing to the Provost.

B. Reappointment of the Dean

When the College's elected Executive Committee members convene to provide the Provost with advice on the annual reappointment of the Dean, they may solicit and consider the views of each departmental chief executive officer, school director, and such others of the constituency within the College as circumstances seem to warrant before submitting their recommendation.