Schedule for Septmber 22, 2016 Board of Trustees Meetingslouisville.edu/president/board-of-trustees/BOT... · Dr. Robert Curtis Hughes Ms. Angela Lewis-Klein Ms. Brucie Moore Mr

Schedule for Septmber 22, 2016

Board of Trustees Meetings

9:00 a.m. Nominating Committee Prather, Benson, Hall, Hayes, Summers

9:15 a.m. Finance Committee Blue, Campbell, Trucios-Haynes, [Vacancy], [Vacancy], [Vacancy]

9:30 a.m. Academic and Student Affairs Committee Hall, Vance, Abrams, Bingham, Hughes, Henderson, Trucios-Haynes

9:45 a.m. Personnel Committee Bingham, Armstrong, Abrams, Blue, Greenberg, Hall, Prather

10:00 a.m. Board of Trustees Annual Meeting

Location for all meetings: Jefferson Room, Grawemeyer Hall

Trustees are invited to attend all meetings

1/121

NOMINATING COMMITTEE

UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE BOARD OF TRUSTEES

9:00 a.m., September 22, 2016

Jefferson Room

Grawemeyer Hall

Tab

I. Call to Order Prather

Approval of Minutes, November 30, 2015 1

II. Discussion Regarding 2016-17 Slate of Officers

and Appropriate Action, if any Prather 2*

III. Adjournment

* under separate cover

NOMINATING COMMITTEE

Dr. Jody Prather, Chair

Bob Benson, Vice Chair

Doug Hall

Larry Hayes

William Summers

2/121

MINUTES OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE MEETING

OF THE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE BOARD OF TRUSTEES

November 30, 2015

The Nominating Committee of the University of Louisville Board of Trustees met on November

30, 2015 at 3:10 p.m. in the Jefferson Room of Grawemeyer Hall, with members present and

absent as follows:

Present: Mr. Robert P. Benson, Jr., Vice Chair, presiding

Mr. Doug Hall

Mr. William Summers

Absent: Dr. Jody Prather, Chair

Mr. Larry Hayes

Other Trustees

Present: Mrs. Marie Abrams

Ms. Victoria Allen

Dr. Larry Benz

Dr. Emily Bingham

Mr. Jonathan Blue (via teleconference)

Mr. Steve Campbell

Dr. Pamela Feldhoff

Mr. Craig Greenberg

Dr. Robert Curtis Hughes

Ms. Angela Lewis-Klein

Ms. Brucie Moore

Mr. Robert W. Rounsavall, III

From the

University: Dr. James R. Ramsey, President

Dr. Neville Pinto, Interim Executive Vice President and University Provost

Dr. David Dunn, Executive Vice President for Health Affairs

Ms. Leslie Strohm, Vice President for Strategy and General Counsel

Mr. Harlan Sands, Sr. Vice President for Finance and Administration

Mr. Keith Inman, Vice President for Advancement

Ms. Becky Simpson, Sr. Assoc. VP for Communications and Marketing

Dr. Kimberly Kempf-Leonard, Dean, College of Arts and Sciences

Mr. John Drees, Assoc. VP for Communications and Marketing

Col. Thomas Russell-Tutty, Army War College Fellow

Mrs. Kathleen Smith, Assistant Secretary

Ms. Trisha W. Smith, Deputy Chief of Staff

Mr. Jake Beamer, Boards Liaison

I. Call to Order

3/121

Having determined a quorum present, Vice Chair Benson called the meeting to order at

3:10 p.m.

Minutes of August 3, 2015

Mr. Hall made a motion, which Mr. Summers seconded, to approve the minutes of

August 3, 2015. The motion passed.

II. Discussion Regarding Nominations to KyOne Health Board

Vice Chair Benson explained the nominations to the KentuckyOne Health Board must go

through the Trustees’ Nominating Committee.

Mr. Summers made a motion, which Mr. Hall seconded, to approve

Chairman Benz’s recommendation that the Board of Trustees approve the

following nominee:

Dr. Sean Francis to KentuckyOne Healthcare, Inc.

The motion passed.

IV. Adjournment

Mr. Hall made a motion, which Mr. Summers seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 3:13

p.m. The meeting adjourned.

Approved by: ___________________________ Secretary

4/121

FINANCE COMMITTEE OF THE


9:15 a.m., September 22, 2016

Jefferson Room

Grawemeyer Hall

Tab

I. Call to Order Trucios-Haynes

Approval of Minutes, August 25, 2016 1

II. Action Item: Approval of Banking Signature Authority Trucios-Haynes 2

III. Adjournment Trucios-Haynes

Committee Members:

[Vacancy], Chair

Enid Trucios-Haynes, Vice Chair

Jonathan Blue

Steve Campbell

Craig Greenberg

[Vacancy]

[Vacancy]

5/121

MINUTES OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE OF THE


August 25, 2016

In Open Session

Members of the Finance Committee of the University of Louisville Board of Trustees met at

1:04 p.m. on August 25, 2016 in the Ballroom B of the University Club, with members present

and absent as follows:

Present: Mr. Ron Butt, Chairman (via videoconference)

Dr. Pamela Feldhoff, Vice Chair, presiding

Mr. Jonathan Blue

Mr. Steve Campbell

Mr. Craig Greenberg

Other Trustees

Present: Ms. Marie Abrams

Mr. William Armstrong

Mr. Robert P. Benson, Jr.

Dr. Larry Benz

Dr. Emily Bingham

Mr. Douglas Hall

Mr. Larry Hayes

Mr. Bruce Henderson


Ms. Brucie Moore

Dr. Jody Prather (via videoconference)

Mr. William Summers, IV

Mr. Aaron Vance

From the

University: Dr. Neville Pinto, Acting President

Dr. Dale B. Billingsley, Acting Executive Vice President and Provost

Dr. Greg Postel, Interim Executive Vice President for Health Affairs

Dr. William Pierce, Executive Vice President for Research and Innovation

Mr. Harlan Sands, Sr. VP for Finance and Administration, CFO/COO



Mr. Dan Hall, Vice President for Community Engagement

Ms. Susan Howarth, Assoc. VP for Finance and Business Affairs

Mr. Rick Graycarek, Asst. Director of Budget and Financial Planning

Mr. Chris Hodgkins, Policy and Budget Analyst

Ms. Priscilla Tingle, Policy and Budget Analyst

Mr. Renaldo Domoney, Policy and Budget Analyst

6/121

Ms. Ann Phillips, Policy and Budget Analyst

Mr. Gary Mans, Director of Media Relations, HSC

Mr. John Karman, Director of Media Relations



Ms. Kathleen M. Smith, Assistant Secretary

Ms. Trisha Smith, Deputy Chief of Staff

Col Archie S. Herndon, Jr., U.S. Army War College Fellow


Additional

Counsel: Mr. Craig C. Dilger, Stoll Keenon Ogden

I. Call to Order

Having determined a quorum present, Vice Chair Feldhoff called the meeting to order at 1:04

p.m.

Approval of Minutes

Mr. Greenberg made a motion, which Mr. Campbell seconded, to approve the minutes of the

June 2, 2016 meeting. The motion passed.

II. Action Item: Approval of 2016-17 Budget

Tuition

Mr. Greenberg made a motion, which Mr. Campbell seconded, to approve

The President’s recommendation that the Board of Trustees approve tuition

changes per the attached schedules for Academic Year (AY) 2016-17 and AY

2017-18. The recommendation is the result of much deliberation and

consultation with the various constituency groups across campus and is

consistent with the tuition rate increase parameters established by the

Council on Postsecondary Education.

The motion passed.

Fees


The President’s recommendation that the Board of Trustees approve the new

fees and adjustments to the existing fees as attached.

The motion passed.

7/121

Housing


The President recommends that the Board of Trustees approve the new

housing rates as attached.

The motion passed.

Meal Plan

Mr. Campbell made a motion, which Mr. Greenberg seconded, to approve

The President recommends that the Board of Trustees approve the new fees

and adjustments to the existing fees listed below.

1) $990/semester for residents living in halls with kitchens

2) $1,550/semester for residents living in halls without kitchens

3) $225/semester for commuter students

The Executive Vice President and University Provost joins the President in

making this recommendation.

The motion passed.

Operating Budget


The President recommends that the Board of Trustees approve the proposed

University operating budget for Fiscal Year 2016-17, as attached.

The motion passed.

III. Action Item: Refinancing of Bond Issue for Steam and Chilled Water Plant

Mr. Sands explained the recommendation and fielded questions from the committee. Mr.

Greenberg made a motion, which Mr. Campbell seconded, to approve

The President’s recommendation that the Board of Trustees adopt the

Resolution attached hereto as Exhibit A for the purposes of:

1. approving the issuance by Metro Government of taxable refunding

revenue bonds for the purposes of (a) refunding the

Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government, Kentucky, Louisville

Medical Center Taxable Revenue Bonds, Series 2011 and (b) paying

costs of issuance of the bonds; and

8/121

2. authorizing officers of the University of Louisville (the

“University”) to approve and execute all documents necessary to

accomplish such actions.

The motion passed.

IV. Adjournment

Mr. Campbell made a motion, which Mr. Greenberg seconded, to adjourn the meeting at

1:16 p.m. The motion passed.

Approved by:

________________________

Secretary

9/121

RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES

UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE

CONCERNING BANKING RESOLUTIONS

Finance Committee – September 22, 2016

Board of Trustees – September 22, 2016

RECOMMENDATION:

The Acting President recommends:

That the University of Louisville Board of Trustees adopts the attached resolution

relating to investment custodial and safekeeping accounts at PNC Capital

Markets, LLC Pittsburg, Pennsylvania.

COMMITTEE ACTION: BOARD ACTION:

Passed ________________ Passed _______________

Did Not Pass ____________ Did Not Pass __________

Other __________________ Other ________________

__________________________ ______________________

Secretary Secretary

10/121

RESOLUTION

RESOLVED THAT:

(1) PNC (“Bank”) is designated a depository of funds of the University of Louisville

(“University”).

(2) This resolution applies to all accounts opened by the University’s Controller’s Office at

the Bank under University of Louisville name.

(3) The following officers of the University, listed below, and future incumbents in these

positions, are authorized to open and/or close Accounts, delegate and delete check

signers, sign checks on, or withdraw funds from, the Accounts and the Bank is authorized

to pay and charge the Accounts for checks or withdrawal requests:

Neville G. Pinto

___________________________

Acting President

Dale B. Billingsley

___________________________

Acting Executive Vice President

and University Provost

Harlan M. Sands

___________________________

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial

& Operating Officer

John R. Shipley

___________________________

Interim Associate Vice-President

for Finance/Controller

(4) The following employees of the University of Louisville, listed below, are authorized to

obtain Treasury Management Services, sign checks on or withdraw funds from the

Accounts as agents of the University and the Bank is authorized to pay and charge the

Accounts for checks or withdrawal requests subject to the conditions of paragraph (5) of

this Resolution:

Beverly Santamouris

___________________________

Director of Accounting and

Financial Reporting

11/121

David M. Woods

___________________________

Assistant Treasurer

(5) The following limitations shall apply to the signature authority of the above named

University of Louisville officers and employees: (a) for amounts less than $100,000 – one

signature which may be mechanical; (b) for amounts equal to, or greater than, $100,000 –

two signatures, one of which may be mechanical.

(6) The officers and employees named above have provided specimen signature herein and

are authorized to sign signature cards and Accounts agreements.

(7) The Assistant Secretary of the University Board of Trustees is authorized and directed to

deliver for and on behalf of the University, a certificate of this resolution to the bank.

(8) The Bank is authorized to rely upon this Resolution until the bank has received written

notice of any amendment or recession of the resolution.

Certificate

I certify that I am the duly qualified Secretary of the Board of Trustees of the University

of Louisville, that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted at the regular

meeting of such Board which was duly held on the 22nd day of September 2016, at

which meeting a quorum was present, and a majority of members present voted in favor

of the adoption of such resolution. I further certify that such resolution is still in full

force and effect.

Dated this 22nd day of September 2016.

______________________________________ Secretary

Board of Trustees

(Seal of the University)

12/121

ACADEMIC AND STUDENT AFFAIRS COMMITTEE


9:30 a.m., September 22, 2016

Jefferson Room

Grawemeyer Hall

Tab

I. Call to Order Hall

Approval of Minutes, January 14, 2016 1

II. Action Item: Approval of Creation of Bachelor of Arts

in Sustainability Pinto 2

III. Action Item: Approval of Creation of Center for Instructional

and Behavioral Research in Schools (CIBRS) Pinto 3

IV. Adjournment Hall

Committee Members:

Doug Hall, Chair

Aaron Vance, Vice Chair

Marie Abrams

Dr. Emily Bingham


Bruce Henderson

Enid Trucios-Haynes

13/121

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ACADEMIC & STUDENT AFFAIRS

COMMITTEE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE BOARD OF TRUSTEES

January 14, 2016

Members of the Academic & Student Affairs Committee of the University of Louisville Board of

Trustees met at 11:12 a.m. on Thursday, January 14, 2016, in Room W210 of Ekstrom Library,

Belknap Campus, with members present and absent as follows:

Present: Mr. Doug Hall, Chair

Ms. Victoria Allen, Vice Chair

Mrs. Marie Abrams

Dr. Emily Bingham

Dr. Pamela Feldhoff

Mr. Bruce Henderson


Other Trustees

Present: Mr. Robert P. Benson, Jr.

Dr. Larry Benz

Mr. Ron Butt

Mr. Stephen Campbell

Mr. Paul Diaz

Mr. Craig Greenberg

Mr. Larry Hayes



Ms. Brucie Moore

Dr. Jody Prather

Mr. Robert W. Rounsavall, III

Mr. William Summers

From the

University: Dr. James R. Ramsey, President

Dr. Neville Pinto, Interim Executive Vice President and University Provost

Dr. Gregory C. Postel, Interim Executive Vice President for Health Affairs





Mr. Keith Inman, Vice President for University Advancement

Ms. Susan Howarth, Assoc. Vice President for Finance and Budget Affairs

Dr. Craig Blakely, Dean, School of Public Health and Information Sciences


Mr. John Karman, Interim Director of Media Relations

Mrs. Kathleen Smith, Assistant Secretary

14/121

Ms. Trisha W. Smith, Deputy Chief of Staff

Mr. Jake Beamer, Board Liaison

Others: Mr. David Saffer, Stites & Harbison

Mr. Sean Southard, RunSwitch

I. Call to Order

Having determined a quorum present, Chair Hall called the meeting to order at 11:12

a.m.

Approval of Minutes, January 15, 2015

Mr. Henderson made a motion, which Mrs. Abrams seconded, to approve the minutes of

January 15, 2015. The motion passed.

II. Action Item: Approval of Creation of Commonwealth Institute of Kentucky

Dr. Pinto briefed the committee on the recommendation to create the Commonwealth

Institute of Kentucky. He introduced Dr. Craig Blakely, Dean of the School of Public

Health and Information Sciences, who explained the creation of the center facilitates

interdisciplinary collaboration among academic researchers, government agencies, and

community organizations to advance population health. The mission of the UofL

Commonwealth Institute of Kentucky is to inform policy and practice that will improve

the health of populations in Kentucky and beyond by facilitating and supporting

transdisciplinary collaborations for research and data analytics.

Drs. Pinto and Blakely then fielded questions from the committee.

Dr. Bingham made a motion, which Mrs. Abrams seconded, to approve the

President’s recommendation that the Board of Trustees approve the creation

of the University of Louisville (UofL) Commonwealth Institute of Kentucky.

The motion passed.

III. Executive Session

Ms. Allen made a motion, which Dr. Hughes seconded, to go into Executive Session to

discuss personnel matters, pursuant to KRS 61.810(1)(f). The motion passed.

IV. Open Meeting Reconvenes

The open meeting reconvened at 11:47 a.m. and Chair Hall reported personnel matters

were discussed.

15/121

Mr. Henderson made a motion, which Dr. Bingham Seconded, to approve the

Academic and Student Affairs Committee’s recommendation to uphold the

expulsion of a student from the Brandeis School of Law (the “Law School”)

for reasons of academic misconduct. The student’s request for readmission

to the Law School is denied. This is the final decision of the Board of

Trustees.

The motion passed unanimously. Ms. Strohm stated for the record that all Trustees were

present for this committee meeting.

V. Adjournment

Dr. Hughes made a motion, which Mrs. Abrams seconded, to adjourn the meeting at

11:45 a.m. The motion passed.

Approved by:

________________________

Secretary

16/121


CONCERNING THE CREATION OF THE

BACHELOR OF ARTS IN SUSTAINABILITY

Academic & Student Affairs Committee: September 22, 2016

Board of Trustees: September 22, 2016

RECOMMENDATION:

The Acting President recommends that the Board of Trustees approve the creation of the

Bachelor of Arts in Sustainability beginning in Fall 2017.

BACKGROUND:

The Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences supports the creation of the Bachelor of Arts in

Sustainability. The degree will be housed in the Department of Urban and Public Affairs (UPA), which

currently coordinates a Master of Interdisciplinary Studies: Concentration in Sustainability, Master of

Urban Planning (MUP), Master of Public Administration (MPA) and a Ph.D. in Urban and Public

Affairs. Both the MPA and MUP degrees are nationally accredited and ranked. At this time, UPA is

the only department in the College of Arts and Sciences that does not offer an undergraduate degree.

The undergraduate Bachelor of Arts in Sustainability program will train students to research,

identify, implement and monitor sustainable processes, and systems. The degree program is designed

to educate, train and prepare students for future careers in sustainability-related endeavors, including

the environment, energy, climate change, public policy, transportation, urban and regional planning,

and also serve as a well-rounded base to allow students to pursue graduate training in affiliated fields

of study.

The degree is designed as an interdisciplinary program and will require a minimum of 124

hours to complete. The degree will leverage current and proposed resources at the university, allowing

students to obtain education and training in sustainability concepts, while also taking advantage of

courses that address sustainable issues within different disciplines. The degree program proposal has

been based on models from other university programs, several years of discussion at the university

among interested departments, and through the Sustainability Council that was appointed by the

Provost in 2008.

The Faculty Senate recommended the creation of the Bachelor of Arts degree in Sustainability at

their meeting on May 4, 2016. The Council on Postsecondary Education 45-day review of the pre-

proposal was completed on July 22, 2016. The Acting Executive Vice President/University Provost joins

the Acting President in making this recommendation.


Passed ________________ Passed _______________


Other __________________ Other ________________

__________________________ ______________________

Secretary Secretary

17/121


CONCERNING THE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE

CENTER FOR INSTRUCTIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH IN SCHOOLS

(CIBRS)



RECOMMENDATION:


University of Louisville (UofL) Center for Instructional and Behavioral Research in Schools

(CIBRS).

BACKGROUND:

Dr. Ann Larson, Dean of the College of Education and Human Development (CEHD)

proposes the creation of the University of Louisville (UofL) Center for Instructional and

Behavioral Research in Schools (CIBRS). Dr. Terry Scott, Professor and Distinguished

University Scholar will serve as the director of the center. The purpose of this Center is to

promote and fund research and community outreach related to the prevention of student failures

(academic, social, health, mental health) in educational settings. It is anticipated that this focus

area encompasses departments across the College of Education and Human Development

(CEHD) as well as units across the university (e.g., Social Work, Psychology, and Public

Health).

Instructional and behavioral research involves the application of scientific methods to

understand and prevent student failure and dysfunction. The proposed Center would create

collaborations among a wide-range of interested parties across the university to focus specifically

on prevention efforts as they relate to education, broadly defined as public schooling from pre-

school through post-secondary education. Current work in this area has been successful but is

limited to isolated departments across the university. Over the past eight years, there have been

five separate grant projects that have been funded through Dr. Scott in the Department of Special

Education, providing a focus on preventing learning and behavioral disorders in schools. Three

of these projects are still in existence and currently bringing in $1.5 million per year to continue

for at least the next two years. One of these, the Academic and Behavior Response to

Intervention (ABRI) project, has been consistently funded on an annual renewal basis for the

past seven years. There is indication from the funding agent that this project is expected to

continue and likely expand well into the future. This project accounts for approximately

$750,000 per year and partially supports multiple faculty and staff positions.

ABRI evaluation activities have allowed for the support of over 7000 teacher-student

classroom observations - currently the largest such dataset in the world. Analyses from this work

have been well-received and there is demand around the world for services in this area

(information provided to New Zealand, Australia, Sweden, Norway, and Netherlands). Further,

18/121

ABRI has produced instructional video modules for Kentucky Education Television which now

owns the rights and is selling them as part of their own training program.

In addition to the ABRI project, the State Personnel Development Grant (SPDG) is

funded at approximately $600,000 per year. The SPDG involves training school personnel from

across the state in effective instructional strategies for students who are at-risk of failure in

reading and mathematics. In addition, this project involves assessment of both intervention

fidelity and outcomes through a comprehensive evaluation plan. Affiliated faculty and staff

conduct research as part of these evaluation efforts with both the ABRI and SPDG projects.

The centralized structure of a center will serve as a hub for the type of increased

collaboration that is necessary to significantly expand funding and visibility across the U.S. and

internationally. The Faculty Senate voted to recommend the creation of the center on June 1,

2016. The Acting Executive Vice President/University Provost joins the President in making this

recommendation.


Passed ________________ Passed _______________


Other __________________ Other ________________

__________________________ ______________________

Secretary Secretary

19/121

PERSONNEL COMMITTEE


9:45 a.m., September 22, 2016

Jefferson Room

Grawemeyer Hall

In Open Session

Tab

I. Call to Order Bingham

Approval of Minutes, August 25, 2016 1

II. Action Item: Approval of Revisions to Personnel Documents Bingham

School of Medicine 2

College of Business 3

III. Executive Session Bingham

Motion to recess to discuss routine personnel matters/

recommendations re: promotion and tenure pursuant

to KRS 61.810(1)(f)

IV. Open Meeting Reconvenes Bingham

Report on Executive Session

Appropriate action, if any

V. Adjournment

Committee Members:

Dr. Emily Bingham, Chair

William Armstrong, Vice Chair

Marie Abrams

Jonathan Blue

Craig Greenberg

Doug Hall

Dr. Jody Prather

20/121

MINUTES OF THE PERSONNEL COMMITTEE OF THE


August 25, 2016

In Open Session

Members of the Personnel Committee of the University of Louisville Board of Trustees met at

1:16 p.m. on August 25, 2016, in Ballroom B of the University Club, with members present and

absent as follows:

Present: Dr. Emily Bingham, Chair

Mr. William Armstrong, Vice Chair

Mrs. Marie Abrams

Mr. Jonathan Blue

Mr. Craig Greenberg

Mr. Doug Hall


Other Trustees


Dr. Larry Benz

Mr. Ron Butt


Dr. Pamela Feldhoff

Mr. Larry Hayes

Mr. Bruce Henderson


Ms. Brucie Moore


Mr. Aaron Vance

From the









Ms. Susan Howarth, Assoc. VP for Finance and Business Affairs

Mr. Rick Graycarek, Asst. Director of Budget and Financial Planning

Mr. Chris Hodgkins, Policy and Budget Analyst

Ms. Priscilla Tingle, Policy and Budget Analyst

Mr. Renaldo Domoney, Policy and Budget Analyst

22/121

Ms. Ann Phillips, Policy and Budget Analyst

Mr. Gary Mans, Director of Media Relations, HSC






Col Archie S. Herndon, Jr., U.S. Army War College Fellow


Outside


I. Call to Order

Having determined a quorum present, Chair Bingham called the meeting to order at 1:16

p.m.

Approval of Minutes, January 14, 2016

Mrs. Abrams made a motion, which Mr. Greenberg seconded, to approve the minutes of

the January 14, 2016 meeting. The motion passed.

II. Executive Session

Mr. Hall made a motion, which Mrs. Abrams seconded, to go into Executive Session to

discuss routine personnel matters and recommendations regarding promotion and tenure,

pursuant to KRS 61.810(1)(f). The motion passed.

III. Open Meeting Reconvenes

Chair Bingham reconvened the open session at 1:47 p.m. and reported the committee

discussed personnel matters.

Monthly Personnel Matters

Mr. Armstrong made a motion, which Mrs. Abrams seconded, to approve the

President’s recommendation that the following personnel recommendations

be approved by the Board of Trustees:

College of Arts and Sciences

Blake Beattie, PhD, Associate Professor (Tenured) and Acting Department

Chair of History; additional appointment as Department Chair of History,

23/121

July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017. Appointment as Department Chair is at

the pleasure of the Board of Trustees.

Ann Hall, PhD, Ohio State University; Professor with tenure and

Department Chair of Comparative Humanities, August 1, 2016.

Appointment as Department Chair is at the pleasure of the Board of

Trustees.

David Howarth, PhD, Professor (Tenured) of Geography and Geosciences;

additional appointment as Department Chair of Geography and Geosciences,

July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017. Appointment as Department Chair is at

the pleasure of the Board of Trustees.

Elizabeth Jones, J.D., Assistant Professor (Probationary) of Pan African

Studies; additional appointment as the Robert Douglas Endowed Chair in

Pan African Studies, May 1, 2016. The additional appointment as the Robert

Douglas Endowed Chair in Pan African Studies is at the pleasure of the

Board of Trustees.

Scott Massey, M.F.A., Associate Professor (Tenured) of Fine Arts; additional

appointment as Chair of Fine Arts, July 1, 2016. The additional appointment

as Chair of Fine Arts is at the pleasure of the Board of Trustees.

Janet Woodruff-Borden, PhD, Professor (Tenured) of Psychological and

Brain Sciences; additional appointment as Associate Dean of Graduate

Studies, July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017. Appointment as Associate Dean

of Graduate Studies is at the pleasure of the Board of Trustees.

College of Education and Human Development

Ginevra Courtade, PhD, Associate Professor (Tenured) of Special Education;

additional appointment as Department Chair of Special Education, July 1,

2016. Appointment as Department Chair is at the pleasure of the Board of

Trustees.

Michele Foster, EdD, Harvard Graduate School of Education; Professor with

Tenure of Early Childhood and Elementary Education and the Henry

Heuser Endowed Chair in Urban Education Partnerships. Professor

appointment begins August 1, 2016. Henry Heuser Endowed Chair

appointment is effective August 1, 2016 through July 31, 2019 and is at the

pleasure of the Board of Trustees.

Susan Longerbeam, PhD, University of Maryland; Associate Professor with

Tenure of Counseling and Human Development, August 1, 2016.

24/121

Carlos McCray, Ed.D., Bowling Green State University; Associate Professor

with Tenure of Educational Leadership, Evaluation, and Organizational

Development, August 1, 2016.

Meghan Pifer, PhD, Pennsylvania State University; Associate Professor with

Tenure of Educational Leadership, Evaluation, and Organizational

Development, August 1, 2016.

Dr. Jeffrey Sun, PhD, Professor (Tenured) of Educational Leadership,

Evaluation, and Organizational Development; additional appointment as

Department Chair of Educational Leadership, Evaluation, and

Organizational Development. Appointment as Department Chair is at the

pleasure of the Board of Trustees.

School of Law

Lars Smith, JD, Professor of Law (tenured) and the Samuel J. Stallings

Chair in Law; additional appointment as Associate Dean for Academic

Affairs 7/1/2016 through 6/30/2018. Appointment as the Samuel J. Stallings

Chair in Law and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs are at the pleasure of

the Board of Trustees.

School of Medicine

Christian Furman, MD, Professor (Term) of Family and Geriatric Medicine

and Interim Medical Director of the Institute for Sustainable Health and

Optimal Aging; additional appointments as Medical Director of the Institute

for Sustainable Health and Optimal Aging and the Margaret Dorward

Smock Endowed Professor of Geriatrics, July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2019.

The appointment as Medical Director for the Institute for Sustainable Health

and Optimal Aging and the Margaret Doward Smock Endowed Professor of

Geriatrics are at the pleasure of the Board of Trustees.

Gilbert Liu, MD, Associate Professor (Tenured) of Pediatrics (General

Pediatrics); additional appointment as Endowed Chair in Urban Health

Policy, August 15, 2016 through August 14, 2021.

Speed School

Y. Kevin Chou, PhD, Purdue University; Professor (Tenured) of Industrial

Engineering and Edward Reep Clark Chair of Advanced Manufacturing,

January 1, 2017.

PROMOTION AND TENURE

College of Arts and Sciences

25/121

Latrica E. Best, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to

Associate Professor of Pan African Studies and Sociology, July 1, 2016 and

award of tenure, July 1, 2017.

Csaba Biro, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to

Associate Professor of Mathematics, July 1, 2016 and award of tenure, July

1, 2017.

Derrick R. Brooms, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Sociology, July 1, 2016 and award of

tenure, July 1, 2017.

Joy Carew, Ph.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Pan African Studies, July 1, 2016.

Judith H. Danovitch, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences,

July 1, 2016 and award of tenure, July 1, 2017.

Guy Dove, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to

Associate Professor of Philosophy, July 1, 2016 and award of tenure, July 1,

2017.

Jasmine L. Farrier, Ph.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Political Science, July 1, 2016.

Bonnie B. Fonseca-Greber, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Classical and Modern Languages,

July 1, 2016 and award of tenure, July 1, 2017.

Catherine A. Fosl, Ph.D., Director of the Anne Braden Center for Social

Justice Research; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Women’s and Gender Studies, July 1, 2016.

Jonathan Haws, Ph.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Anthropology, July 1, 2016.

Baron Kelly, Ph.D., Associate Professor (Probationary) of Theatre Arts;


Jinjia Li, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to


1, 2017.

Benjamin Mast, Ph.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Psychological and Brain Sciences, July 1, 2016.

26/121

Eric S. McCord, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary)

to Associate Professor of Criminal Justice, July 1, 2016 and award of tenure,

July 1, 2017.

David S. Owen, Ph.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Philosophy, July 1, 2016.

Patrick Pranke, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Tenured) to

Associate Professor (Tenured) of Comparative Humanities, July 1, 2016.

Paul J. Rosen, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to

Associate Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences, July 1, 2016 and


Siobhan E. Smith, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary)

to Associate Professor of Communication, July 1, 2016 and award of tenure,

July 1, 2017.

Hristomir A. Stanev, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of English, July 1, 2016 and award of


Cristina Tone, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to


1, 2017.

Margath A. Walker, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Geography and Geosciences, July 1,

2016 and award of tenure, July 1, 2017.

Sherri Leronda Wallace, Ph.D.; promotion from Associate Professor

(Tenured) to Professor (Tenured) of Political Science, July 1, 2016.

College of Business

Yong Chao, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to

Associate Professor of Economics, August 1, 2016 and award of tenure,

August 1, 2017.

Robert Paul Garrett, Jr., Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Entrepreneurship, July 1, 2016 and

award of tenure, August 1, 2017.

27/121

Ying Huang, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to

Associate Professor of Accountancy, August 1, 2016 and award of tenure,

August 1, 2017.

Joshua Pinkston, PhD; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary)

to Associate Professor of Economics, August 1, 2016, and award of Tenure,

August 1, 2017.

Tian Tang, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to

Associate Professor of Finance, August 1, 2016 and award of tenure, August

1, 2017.

School of Dentistry

Eric Bednar, D.D.S.; promotion from Clinical Assistant Professor (Part-

Time) to Clinical Associate Professor (Part-Time), Department of

Orthodontics, Pediatric Dentistry, and Special Care, July 1, 2016.

Jan Stanislaw Potempa, Ph.D., University Scholar; change of appointment

from Professor (Term) to Professor (Tenured), Department of Oral

Immunology and Infectious Diseases, July 1, 2016.

Randall Lee Vaught, D.M.D.; promotion from Associate Professor

(Term/Rolling) to Professor (Term/Rolling), Department of General

Dentistry and Oral Medicine, July 1, 2016.

College of Education and Human Development

Meera Alagaraja, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary)

to Associate Professor of Educational Leadership, Evaluation, and

Organizational Development, July 1, 2016 and award of tenure, August 1,

2017.

Robert Pennington, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Special Education, July 1, 2016 and


Michael Bradley Shuck, Ed.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Educational Leadership,

Evaluation, and Organizational Development, July 1, 2016 and award of

tenure, August 1, 2017.

Carla Vidoni, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to

Associate Professor of Health and Sport Studies, July 1, 2016 and award of


28/121

Kent School of Social Work

Becky Antle, Ph.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Social Work, August 1, 2016.

Adrian J. Archuleta, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Social Work, August 1, 2016 and


Crystal Collins-Camargo, Ph.D.; promotion from Associate Professor

(Tenured) to Professor (Tenured) of Social Work, August 1, 2016.

Seana Golder, Ph.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Social Work, August 1, 2016.

Brandeis School of Law

Jamie R. Abrams, LL.M.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor (Probationary) of Law, July 1, 2016.

Ariana R. Levinson, J.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Law, July 1, 2016.

Laura R. McNeal, J.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary)

to Associate Professor (Probationary) of Law, July 1, 2016.

Shelley Santry, J.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to Associate

Professor (Term) of Law, July 1, 2016.

University Libraries

Carrie Daniels, M.S.L.I.S.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured), Libraries, July 1, 2016.

Terri Holtze, M.L.I.S.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to


Randy Kuehn, M.L.I.S.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary)

to Associate Professor, Libraries, July 1, 2016 and award of tenure, July 1,

2017.

Claudene Sproles, M.I.S.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to


School of Medicine

29/121

Ashutosh Barve, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Medicine (Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and

Nutrition), July 1, 2016.

Jun Cai, M.D., Ph.D., Assistant Professor (Probationary) of Pediatrics

(Kosair’s Children’s Hospital Research Institute); expiration of appointment,

October 31, 2017.

Rodrigo Cavallazzi, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Medicine (Pulmonary, Critical Care, and

Sleep Disorders Medicine), July 1, 2016.

Donghoon Chung, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Microbiology and Immunology, July 1, 2016.

Keith Phillip Cross, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Pediatrics, July 1, 2016 and award

of tenure, July 1, 2017.

Melissa Lynn Currie, M.D., FAAP; promotion from Associate Professor

(Term) to Professor (Term) of Pediatrics (Forensic Medicine), July 1, 2016.

Eric G. Davis, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to Associate

Professor (Term) of Surgery (Transplantation), July 1, 2016.

Lori Ann Devlin, D.O., M.H.A.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term)

to Associate Professor (Term) of Pediatrics (Neonatology), July 1, 2016.

Michael Flaherty, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary)

to Associate Professor of Medicine (Cardiovascular Medicine), July 1, 2016

and award of tenure, July 1, 2017.

Renee V. Girdler, M.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Term) to

Professor (Term) of Family and Geriatric Medicine, July 1, 2016.

Rakesh Gopinathannair, M.B.B.S.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Term) to Associate Professor (Term) of Medicine (Cardiovascular

Medicine), July 1, 2016.

Jennifer Hamm, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women's Health,

July 1, 2016.

Brian James Holland, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Pediatrics (Cardiology), July 1, 2016.

30/121

Steven House, M.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Term) to

Professor (Term) of Family and Geriatric Medicine, July 1, 2016.

Christopher M. Jones, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Surgery (Transplantation), July 1,

2016 and award of tenure, August 16, 2017.

Jeffrey R. Jorden, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Surgery (Colon/Rectal), July 1, 2016.

Theodore S. Kalbfleisch, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term)

to Associate Professor (Term) of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, July

1, 2016.

Kayiguvwe O. Kragha, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Radiology, July 1, 2016.

Nancy Taylor Kubiak, M.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Term) to

Professor (Term) of Medicine (General Internal Medicine, Palliative

Medicine, and Medical Education), July 1, 2016.

Rainer Lenhardt, M.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Term) to

Professor (Term) of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, July 1, 2016.

Bing Li, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to

Associate Professor of Microbiology and Immunology, July 1, 2016 and


William David Lohr, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Pediatrics (Child/Adolescent Psychiatry and

Psychology), July 1, 2016.

Igor Lukashevich, M.D., Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology; award

of tenure, September 1, 2016.

Eva Roberts Markham, Ed.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Term)

to Professor (Term) of Pediatrics (Weisskopf Child Evaluation Center), July

1, 2016.

Rhonda Mattingly, Ed.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery and

Communicative Disorders, July 1, 2016.

Nicholas M. Mellen, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Pediatrics (KCHRI), July 1, 2016.

31/121

Daniel J. O’Brien, M.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Emergency Medicine, July 1, 2016.

Adrian O’Hagan, M.D.; joint promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Pediatrics and Medicine (Pulmonary, Critical

Care, and Sleep Disorders Medicine), July 1, 2016.

Dipendra Parajuli, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Medicine (Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and

Nutrition), July 1, 2016.

Amber Lynette Pendleton, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Clinical

Professor (Part-Time) to Associate Clinical Professor (Part-Time) of

Pediatrics, July 1, 2016.

Rebecca Redman, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary)

to Associate Professor of Medicine (Medical Oncology and Hematology), July

1, 2016 and award of tenure, September 1, 2017.

M. Elaine Stauble, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women's Health,

July 1, 2016.

Michelle Dee Stevenson, M.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Term)

to Professor (Term) of Pediatrics (Emergency Medicine), July 1, 2016.

Deanna Rae Todd Tzanetos, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Term) to Associate Professor (Term) of Pediatrics, July 1, 2016.

Victor H. van Berkel, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Cardiovascular and Thoracic

Surgery, July 1, 2016 and award of tenure, August 1, 2017.

Marina Varbanova, M.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine,

July 1, 2016.

Lori Wagner, M.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Term) to Professor

(Term) of Medicine (General Internal Medicine, Palliative Medicine, and

Medical Education), July 1, 2016.

School of Music

Stephen Patrick Mattingly, D.M.; promotion from Assistant Professor

(Probationary) to Associate Professor of Performance Studies, July 1, 2016

and award of tenure, July 1, 2017.

32/121

School of Nursing

Catherine L. Batscha, D.N.P.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term), Nursing, August 1, 2016.

S. Lee Ridner, Ph.D., Associate Dean of Graduate Programs; promotion

from Associate Professor (Tenured) to Professor (Tenured), Nursing, July 1,

2016. The additional appointment as Associate Dean of Graduate Programs

is at the pleasure of the Board of Trustees.

Deborah V. Thomas, Ed.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Term) to

Professor (Term), Nursing, August 1, 2016.

School of Public Health and Information Sciences

Qunwei Zhang, M.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences,

July 1, 2016.

J.B. Speed School of Engineering

Delaina Amos, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering

(Probationary) award of tenure, July 1, 2017.

Karen Bertocci, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Term) to

Associate Professor (Term) of Bioengineering, July 1, 2016.

Matt Bohm, Ph.D., Assistant Professor (Probationary) of Mechanical

Engineering; expiration of appointment, June 30, 2017.

Ayman El-Baz, Ph.D.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Bioengineering, July 1, 2016.

Sam Park, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary) to

Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering, July 1, 2016 and award of


Eric Rouchka, D.Sc.; promotion from Associate Professor (Tenured) to

Professor (Tenured) of Computer Engineering and Computer Science, July

1, 2016.

Stuart Williams, Ph.D.; promotion from Assistant Professor (Probationary)

to Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering, July 1, 2016 and award of


33/121

The motion passed.

IV. Adjournment

Mr. Greenberg made a motion, which Mr. Armstrong seconded, to adjourn the meeting.

The motion passed the meeting adjourned at 1:48 p.m.

Approved by:

__________________________

Secretary

34/121

MINUTES OF THE PERSONNEL COMMITTEE OF THE


August 25, 2016

In Open Session

Members of the Personnel Committee of the University of Louisville Board of Trustees met at

1:16 p.m. on August 25, 2016, in Ballroom B of the University Club, with members present and

absent as follows:

Present: Dr. Emily Bingham, Chair

Mr. William Armstrong, Vice Chair

Mrs. Marie Abrams

Mr. Jonathan Blue

Mr. Craig Greenberg

Mr. Doug Hall


Other Trustees


Dr. Larry Benz

Mr. Ron Butt


Dr. Pamela Feldhoff

Mr. Larry Hayes

Mr. Bruce Henderson


Ms. Brucie Moore


Mr. Aaron Vance

From the











I. Call to Order

35/121

Chair Bingham called the meeting to order at 1:17 p.m.

II. Routine Matters/Recommendations re: Promotion and Tenure

Routine personnel matters and recommendations regarding promotion and tenure were

discussed.

III. Adjournment

The executive session was adjourned.

Approved by:

____________________________

Secretary

36/121


CONCERNING THE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

PERSONNEL POLICY

Personnel Committee – September 22, 2016


RECOMMENDATION:

The Acting President recommends that the Board of Trustees approves the revised School

of Medicine Policy for Promotion, Appointment and Tenure and for Periodic Career Review in

the form attached to be effective immediately.

(Revisions on Pages 5, 19, 22, 24 of 31)

BACKGROUND:

These revisions were approved by the School of Medicine Faculty and the Faculty

Senate. They have been reviewed and recommended by University General Counsel and the

Executive Vice President and University Provost.

Committee Action: Board Action:

Passed: ___________ Passed: ___________

Did Not Pass: ______ Did Not Pass: ______

Other: ____________ Other: ____________

_____________________________ __________________________________

Secretary Secretary

37/121

POLICY FOR PROMOTION, APPOINTMENT AND TENURE AND FOR PERIODIC CAREER REVIEW IN THE

UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this document is to present the criteria and procedures employed within the School of Medicine (the unit) for the evaluation of promotion, appointment and tenure requests and for periodic career reviews. The document specifies minimum acceptable levels of teaching, research and service. Departmental criteria are not required but, where they exist, procedures for evaluation of same must be in accord with the policy cited herein and must be explicit in regard to requirements upon which a recommendation for appointment, promotion, and/or tenure is made for each faculty rank, or a positive periodic career review. It is understood that departments may stipulate criteria more rigorous than those addressed in this document, provided they are consistent with the University of Louisville's Minimum Guidelines document, The Redbook, and the Bylaws and Rules of the School of Medicine. The contents of the unit document apply to all faculty: executive faculty and general faculty as defined in the School of Medicine Bylaws. (A member of the executive faculty of the School of Medicine holds a full-time, academic appointment in the University of Louisville with a primary appointment in the School of Medicine; or may be a part-time or gratis general faculty who has been elected to the executive faculty). In order to evaluate the contributions of candidates for promotion, appointment, tenure, and periodic career review in achieving the missions of the School of Medicine and its departments, the following documents must be developed.

A. The faculty of the School of Medicine shall develop, and maintain current, a mission statement

that must be approved by the dean. The dean shall be held accountable for assuring that the School achieves its mission.

B. Each department shall develop, and maintain current, a mission statement and specific goals and

objectives to assist in the systematic accomplishment of the mission of the School of Medicine. The department chair shall be held accountable for assuring that the department achieves its mission, and a major tool for doing so shall be the combined faculty work plans negotiated with each departmental faculty member.

I. FACULTY APPOINTMENTS AND TENURE

A. ALL FULL-TIME FACULTY APPOINTMENTS SHALL BE ONE OF THREE KINDS:

1. Non-tenurable Appointments

a. Temporary Appointments

Temporary appointments to the various academic ranks, which include lecturers and visiting faculty, are those made for specifically limited time periods less than one year for special purposes. In no case shall temporary appointments or renewals result in the acquisition of tenure.

b. Term Faculty Appointments

1. All non-tenurable full-time faculty that are not “temporary” will be called

“term”. Term faculty shall be full-time faculty appointments without tenure for a stipulated contract period not to exceed three years. Such appointments are not probationary appointments as described in Section 4.1. of The Redbook, and no such appointments, continuation or renewal thereof shall result in acquisition of tenure or implied renewal for subsequent terms.

38/121

School of Medicine Policy for Promotion, Appointment and Tenure and Periodic Career Review

Page 2 of 31

2. A majority of faculty in the School of Medicine shall be probationary or tenured (The Redbook, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1). Term faculty may be funded through general funds, restricted funds, or clinical revenues.

3. Term faculty shall meet the standards for probationary appointment to the

designated rank with consideration for the areas assigned in the annual work plan and shall be subject to annual and career reviews for faculty of the Unit. Term faculty may apply for promotion in rank according to the criteria in this document.

4. Term faculty appointments may be renewed for the convenience of the

University if the dean determines that the services of the incumbent are needed for the renewal term.

5. Faculty on term appointments shall be eligible to transfer to probationary

appointments if they were not previously on a probationary appointment and if the advertisement used to hire the individual stated this possibility. Time in rank will not be counted toward the probationary period unless negotiated at the time of track transfer. The provost’s letter of appointment to probationary status shall state whether and to what extent the new appointment shall consider time served in non-tenurable status as prior service.

6. Rolling contracts recognize and reward the accomplishments of term faculty.

Rolling contracts of a three-year duration will be available after five years of service at the University of Louisville. Rolling contracts are only available to those faculty members at the rank of associate professor or above. Rolling contracts are renewable every year for an additional three years. Appointment on such contracts are at the discretion of the chair but must conform to fiscal limitations and be approved by the dean and provost.

2. Probationary Appointments

a. Definition - Probationary appointments shall be appointments of full-time faculty

members without tenure other than those described in Section 4.1.2 of The Redbook, provided, however, that no probationary appointment to the University shall extend beyond the period when tenure would normally be granted (Section 4.2.2 of The Redbook).

b. Transfers out of a probationary appointment into a non-tenurable appointment may be

requested anytime but must be complete prior to the time that the tenure review would begin. This is normally at the end of the fifth year of service. Transfers back to probationary status are then prohibited.

c. Instructors - Probationary appointments to the rank of instructor shall be for stipulated

terms of one year each.

d. Assistant and Associate Professors - Probationary appointments to the rank of assistant or associate professor shall require board certification in the disciplines where this is available and patient care is provided. For others, post-doctoral training will be required for these ranks. The appointments will be for stipulated terms not to exceed two years on the initial appointment, nor three years for appointments made thereafter.

e. Professors - Professors shall be awarded tenure if employed subsequent to the initial probationary appointment. The duration of initial appointment shall be specified in the letter of appointment.

39/121


Page 3 of 31

3. Tenure Appointments

a. Definition - Tenure is the right of certain full-time faculty personnel who hold academic

rank to continuous full-time employment without reduction in academic rank until retirement or dismissal as provided in Section 4.5.3 of The Redbook. Tenure is granted in an academic unit (Section 3.1.1 of The Redbook) in accordance with the procedures established in Section 4.2.2.H. of The Redbook.

b. Administrators - Administrative personnel who have acquired tenure are subject to the

regulations herein on tenure and the provisions governing termination only in their capacities as faculty members.

c. Tenure recommendations - Recommendations concerning the award or denial of tenure

shall originate in the faculty of the academic unit in which tenure is to be granted.

4. Academic Appointment, Full-time

a. The requirements for appointment to a full-time faculty position in the School of Medicine usually shall include, as a minimum, an advanced, usually doctoral, degree (M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc., Ed.D. or equivalent). In disciplines where board certification is available and patient care is provided, appointments at the rank of assistant professor or above shall require board certification. For others, post-doctoral training will be required for these ranks. Additional requirements for appointment such as board certification, possession of a license to practice medicine in Kentucky, etc. shall be stipulated in the departmental documents where applicable.

b. The appointee shall sign a contract, approved by the Board of Trustees, stipulating that

the appointment is made subject to the regulations, policies, and provisions of employment at the University of Louisville including participation in the School of Medicine Professional Practice Plan.

c. Joint appointments will require that career reviews (mid-tenure, tenure, promotional,

periodic) be done in both departments. Criteria for appointment as an associate in a department shall be stipulated in departmental documents, where applicable. Associate appointments are weaker affiliations and never entail salary commitments.

B. ACADEMIC APPOINTMENT, PART-TIME 1. Part-time faculty shall be appointed by contract to teach specified courses or to engage in specified

instruction, research or service less than full-time for a designated period. The requirements for appointment to a part-time faculty position in the School of Medicine shall be the same as those for full-time academic appointments. No such appointment, continuation, or renewal thereof shall result in acquisition of tenure or implied renewal for subsequent periods. It is recognized that the responsibilities of the faculty in this category may differ from those with full-time appointments.

2. For all faculty, proficiency in the areas of the annual assignment must be used as the basis for

reappointment and/or contract renewal. Departmental documents may stipulate additional requirements for appointment and reappointment and include criteria by which achievements in scholarship or other areas consistent with the annual work plan shall be measured.

C. EMERITUS

Such honorary title may be conferred upon retirement if requested by the departmental faculty and dean and approved by the provost and Board of Trustees.

40/121


Page 4 of 31

D. ACADEMIC APPOINTMENT, GRATIS

1. Gratis (voluntary) faculty appointment shall be one of three kinds: clinical, adjunct (basic science), and adjunct (faculty, basic science or clinical, at other institutions).

2. The requirements for appointment to a gratis faculty position in the School of Medicine usually

shall include, as a minimum, an advanced, usually doctoral, degree (M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc., Ed.D. or equivalent). In disciplines where board certification is available and patient care is provided, appointments at the rank of assistant professor or above shall require board certification. For others, post-doctoral training will be required for these ranks. Additional requirements for appointment such as board certification, possession of a license to practice medicine in Kentucky, etc., shall be stipulated in the departmental documents where applicable.

3. School of Medicine gratis faculty appointment, reappointment and promotion policies are further

defined in Appendix B.

II. FACULTY PERSONNEL REVIEWS A. ANNUAL REVIEWS

1. All part-time, term, probationary, and tenured faculty must be reviewed in writing annually by

their department chair or designee. The annual review shall be done in conjunction with the Salary Increase Based Upon Performance (SIBUP) evaluation. Annual reviews and SIBUP evaluations must evaluate faculty performance under the distribution of the effort indicated in the approved annual work plan (Section IV.A. of The Redbook’s Minimum Guidelines for Faculty Personnel Reviews).

2. As part of the documentation for annual review a report of all professional work outside the

University must be submitted. 3. Annual work assignments and reviews shall be part of all career review files. Reappointments of

term faculty as well as all career reviews (annual, promotion, tenure and periodic) must be linked to the annual work assignments. Satisfactory annual reviews shall not in and of themselves constitute sufficient grounds for promotion, tenure, or satisfactory periodic career reviews.

4. The appeal process for annual reviews and SIBUP evaluations are outlined in a separate School of

Medicine Policies for Annual Reviews and Salary Increase Based Upon Performance document and is outside of the grievance process of Appendix A of The Redbook.

B. PROMOTION AND TENURE OF TENURABLE FACULTY

1. Time Required

a. Each faculty member eligible for tenure must (with the exceptions listed in Article

II.B.2,3) be evaluated by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure (PAT) Committee before the end of twelve months after five years of service applied to tenure. Evaluation for tenure in the School of Medicine shall proceed unless the faculty member resigns from the University or is subject to termination.

b. All probationary faculty who have had seven years of service counted as in a tenurable

faculty position, if reemployed full-time without a transfer to a non-tenurable appointment, shall be granted tenure.

2. Leaves of Absence

41/121


Page 5 of 31

One year spent on an officially approved leave of absence may be counted toward the seven years of full-time service necessary for tenure. Any leave granted during the probationary period must carry with it a stipulation in writing as to whether the leave counts toward tenure.

3. Extension of Probationary Period

A faculty member who faces extenuating circumstances that does not require a leave of absence but results in a significant reduction in ability to perform normal duties may request an extension of the probationary period for no less than six months and no more than one year. Such extensions must be requested and approved at the time the circumstances exist and before the end of the fifth year of the probationary period and must have documentation satisfactory to the dean for recommendation to the provost for approval.

4. Prior Service

Previous full-time service with the rank of instructor or higher or comparable status in institutions of higher learning may be counted toward the acquisition of tenure. The provost’s letter of appointment shall state whether and to what extent the appointment shall consider time served at the other institution applies as prior service.

5. Criteria shall include the following:

a. Proficiency in teaching as defined in Appendix A. b. Proficiency in research as defined in Appendix A. c. Proficiency in service as defined in Appendix A. This can be further defined as

community service, service to research and/or clinical service and primarily involves medical and/or basic science expertise.

d. In reviewing the activities described in the foregoing paragraphs, the PAT Committee

shall consider whether the conduct of the faculty member indicates an ability to collaborate effectively with faculty and other members of the university community.

e. The adherence of a faculty member to professional standards shall be considered in

retention, promotion, tenure, and periodic career review decisions. The PAT Committee shall consider rules of professional conduct for the faculty of the School of Medicine as well as rules and standards of School of Medicine accrediting bodies, of the teaching profession, and of the University (including The Redbook).

f. Extramural review shall be required as provided for in Article II.K.10.

In addition, service to the profession, the Unit, the University, and the community that does not primarily involve medical and/or basic scientific expertise may also be considered.

C. TENURE AND PROMOTION OR APPOINTMENT TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF TENURABLE

FACULTY

1. The requirements for promotion to associate professor are equivalent to those for granting tenure. It is recommended that requests be submitted jointly; i.e., a request for promotion should be coupled to a request for tenure. The departmental executive faculty and the chair, as determined by procedures outlined in Article II.K.10, have the major responsibility for initiating consideration of promotion and tenure.

42/121


Page 6 of 31

2. The candidate's record shall provide evidence of proficiency in teaching, research, and service.

However, institutional service and administrative activities are considered more as a supplement to academic activities than as a substitute. In the evaluation no rigid formulae are applied; however, the individual's accomplishments must provide promise of continuing proficiency in those endeavors which best support the research and academic mission of the School of Medicine and the University.

3. In addition to proficiency, excellence must be demonstrated in an area of assignment that meets or

exceeds a 20% effort on, and is documented in, the annual work plan. Excellence in each area is defined in Appendix A.

4. In addition, scholarship, defined as the creation of new knowledge and the dissemination and

acceptance of it by peers, in one area must be demonstrated at the time of review. Scholarship in the areas of research, teaching and service is defined in Appendix A.

5. Normally, requests for promotion to associate professor and tenure will not be considered until a

full probationary period of five years in faculty status has been served. Requests for early action are appropriate if the faculty member's accomplishments meet the stated criteria. Accomplishments made prior to employment at the University or while serving in a non-tenurable appointment at the University can be considered in these deliberations. A faculty member may request only one evaluation for early tenure. Once originated this evaluation shall proceed as indicated in Section 4.2.2.H of The Redbook unless the faculty member requests its withdrawal.

6. Candidates for new appointments at the rank of associate professor shall satisfy the same criteria

as described above for promotion to that rank.

7. Extramural review shall be required as provided for in Article II.K.10.

D. PROMOTION OR APPOINTMENT TO PROFESSOR OF TENURED OR TENURABLE FACULTY

1. Promotion to professor should be awarded with care and only to those who show promise of continuing proficiency, as defined in Appendix A, in teaching, research and service with consideration for their work assignment. However, despite this anticipatory element, a recommendation for granting the rank of professor shall be made in recognition of accomplishments already attained. To assist the PAT Committee in their evaluation, all reprints of papers published during the review period will be forwarded and the candidate is to designate the four most significant publications in his/her bibliography, at least one of which shall be in the past five years.

2. Superior achievement and promise of continuing superiority must be evidenced by excellence in

an area of assignment that meets or exceeds a 20% effort on, and is documented in, the annual work plan as defined in Appendix A. The departmental document, where applicable, must stipulate criteria by which the candidate's achievement and prominence shall be determined as specified in the annual work assignment.

3. In addition, scholarship in one area must be demonstrated at the time of review. Scholarship in the

areas of research, teaching and service is defined in Appendix A.

4. Normally, a minimum of five years in rank shall be served before a recommendation for promotion is considered. It should be understood that a department is not obligated to make a recommendation after the fifth year; a longer interval commonly is necessary to establish acceptable credentials. Seniority shall be considered but shall not, by itself, entitle one to promotion. Request for early promotion are appropriate if the faculty member's accomplishments as an associate professor meet the stated criteria. Accomplishments as an associate professor made prior to employment at the University can be considered in these deliberations.

43/121


Page 7 of 31


6. Candidates for new appointments at the rank of professor shall satisfy the same criteria described

above for promotion to that rank.

E. IMMEDIATE TENURE UPON APPOINTMENT 1. It is recommended that tenure not be granted as a condition of appointment; however, it is

understood that for certain persons of exceptional merit who already have tenure in other universities, it is impractical to expect them to move to the University of Louisville without assurance of tenure. The Redbook does give the University the right to grant tenure at any stage "when an individual situation warrants such action", and states that professors shall receive tenure following their initial probationary period of appointment. The duration of initial appointment shall be specified in the letter of appointment.

2. For associate professors it is suggested that a minimum of one year elapse after the initial

academic year of appointment or fraction thereof, before a tenure consideration is initiated.

3. If possible, it is best to avoid assuring a lifetime position before the individual under consideration has had the opportunity to demonstrate competence in the surroundings peculiar to this new position.

F. PROMOTION OF NON-TENURABLE FACULTY

Criteria shall include Items 1-7: (only the areas in the annual work assignment may be assessed) 1. Proficiency in teaching as defined in Appendix A. Proficiency in teaching is required of all

faculty if teaching is an assigned area. 2. Proficiency in research as defined in Appendix A, if research is an assigned area.

3. Proficiency in service as defined in Appendix A, if service is an assigned area. This can be further defined as community service, service to research and/or clinical service and does primarily involve medical and/or basic science expertise.

4. Scholarly activity, as defined in Appendix A.IV., on average annually

5. In reviewing the activities described in the foregoing paragraphs, the PAT Committee shall

consider whether the conduct of the faculty member indicates an ability to collaborate effectively with faculty and other members of the university community.

6. The adherence of a faculty member to professional standards shall be considered in retention,

promotion and periodic career review decisions. The PAT Committee shall consider rules of professional conduct for the faculty of the School of Medicine as well as rules and standards of School of Medicine accrediting bodies, of the teaching profession, of the University (including The Redbook), and the School of Medicine.


In addition, service to the profession, the Unit, the University, and the community which does not primarily involve medical and/or basic scientific expertise may be considered.

G. PROMOTION OR APPOINTMENT TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF NON-TENURABLE FACULTY

44/121


Page 8 of 31

1. The departmental executive faculty and the chair, as determined by procedures outlined in Article II.K have the major responsibility for initiating consideration of promotion.

2. The candidate's record shall provide evidence of proficiency in research, teaching and service for

the areas assigned. However, institutional service and administrative activities are considered more as a supplement to academic activities than as a substitute. In the evaluation no rigid formulae are applied; however, the individual's accomplishments must provide promise of continuing proficiency in those endeavors which best support the research and academic mission of the School of Medicine and the University.

3 In addition to proficiency, excellence must be demonstrated in an area of assignment that meets or

exceeds a 20% effort on, and is documented in, the annual work plan. Excellence in each area is defined in Appendix A.

4. Normally, requests for promotion to associate professor will not be considered until a full period

of five years in faculty status has been served. Requests for early action are appropriate if the faculty member's accomplishments meet the stated criteria. Accomplishments made prior to employment at the University can be considered in these deliberations.

5. Candidates for new appointments at the rank of associate professor shall satisfy the same criteria

as described above for promotion to that rank. 6. Extramural review shall be required as provided for in Article II.K.10.

H. PROMOTION OR APPOINTMENT TO PROFESSOR OF NON-TENURABLE FACULTY

1. Promotion to professor should be awarded with care and only to those who show promise of

continuing proficiency in the activities included in the annual work assignment and defined in Appendix A. However, despite this anticipatory element, a recommendation for granting the rank of professor shall be made in recognition of accomplishments already attained.

2. Superior achievement and promise of continuing superiority must be evidenced by excellence in

an area of assignment that meets or exceeds a 20% effort on, and is documented in, the annual work plan as defined in Appendix A. The departmental document, where applicable, must stipulate criteria by which the candidate's achievement and prominence shall be determined, taking into account the area(s) chosen for variable career emphasis included in the annual work plan.

3. Normally, a minimum of five years in rank shall be served before a recommendation for

promotion is considered. It should be understood that a department is not obligated to make a recommendation after the fifth year; a longer interval commonly is necessary to establish acceptable credentials. Seniority shall be considered but shall not, by itself, entitle one to promotion. Request for early promotion are appropriate if the faculty member's accomplishments as an associate professor meet the stated criteria. Accomplishments made as an associate professor prior to employment at the University can be considered in these deliberations.


5. Candidates for new appointments at the rank of professor shall satisfy the same criteria described

above for promotion to that rank with consideration for the areas of their work assignment.

I. APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION OF NON-FULL-TIME FACULTY

1. In a promotion consideration, for example, to the rank of adjunct associate professor or associate clinical (gratis) professor, there should be tangible evidence that a candidate's contributions are significant to the unit's academic mission. Length of time in rank by itself shall not make one eligible for promotion.

45/121


Page 9 of 31

2. Part-time faculty shall be held to the criteria specified for full-time non-tenurable faculty with

consideration for their percentage effort and work assignment.

3. Gratis faculty shall be promoted according to criteria set forth in Appendix B. J. PERIODIC CAREER REVIEW

All tenured faculty in the School of Medicine (with the exception of department chairs and the dean, who have special administrative reviews every five years) shall undergo periodic career review after every fifth year of service to evaluate their contribution to the missions of the University, School of Medicine, and department. Candidates shall be evaluated as either "satisfactory: meeting School of Medicine criteria", or "unsatisfactory: not meeting School of Medicine criteria".

1 For faculty with probationary appointments, the midpoint and tenure review shall be the required

career review.

2. Tenured faculty members shall undergo career review after every fifth year of service. When the review period ends in a sabbatical (or other leave) year, the career review shall be deferred until the next academic year. A promotion review shall replace career review for the period in which the promotion occurs. Periodic career reviews shall be conducted in substantially the same fashion as promotion reviews. Criteria shall be proficiency in all areas assigned on the annual work plan for the period under review and scholarly activity as defined in Appendix A.IV. The review process shall not extend beyond the Office of the Dean of the School of Medicine, but the results of such reviews shall be reported annually to the Office of the Vice President for Health Affairs for transmission to the provost.

a. Tenured faculty members evaluated as satisfactory shall begin the next review cycle in

the following academic year.

b. Tenured faculty members evaluated as unsatisfactory shall be re-reviewed two years after the negative evaluation by the dean. Within the first thirty days they shall prepare a development plan in collaboration with, and approved by, their departmental chair or division head. The faculty member and department chair or division head shall jointly execute an agreement to complete the plan and shall forward the plan to the Dean of the School of Medicine for approval. The plan shall include specific requirements to be met within a year. At the end of the year, the faculty member shall then have one year to demonstrate satisfactory performance and will then undergo a follow-up career review. If the faculty member is again evaluated unsatisfactory, the career record of performance shall be forwarded to the Dean of the School of Medicine for appropriate disciplinary action that may include proceedings for termination (Section 4.2.4.A.2 of The Redbook). However, if the faculty member is evaluated satisfactory at the time of the two year follow-up career review, the next five-year review cycle begins with the following year.

c. Where evidence of outstanding performance over the review period warrants, the

reviewing committees shall also assess the appropriateness of the Salary Increase Based Upon Performance evaluations over the review period and may recommend a supplementary salary increase as a reward.

3. For faculty with non-tenurable and part-time appointments (Article I.A.1 and I.B,C,D),

consideration for reappointment shall serve as their periodic career reviews. The criteria shall be pertinent to their defined areas of appointment and performance. Satisfactory reviews require documented proficiency in all areas of the annual work assignment. Those who are evaluated as "satisfactory: meeting School of Medicine criteria" may be offered additional contracts for reappointment. Those who are evaluated as "unsatisfactory: not meeting School of Medicine criteria" cannot be offered another contract.

46/121


Page 10 of 31

4. All University Redbook and School of Medicine rights of due process and appeal for non-

tenurable, probationary, and tenured faculty shall pertain in these periodic career reviews. K. PROCEDURES FOR TENURE, PROMOTION, AND PERIODIC CAREER REVIEW

1. Access to Documentation

In all considerations of appointment, promotion, tenure and periodic career reviews, the personnel documents pertaining to the faculty member under consideration including a current curriculum vitae, letters of recommendation, teaching evaluations, reprints of articles, and documentation of other forms of scholarship when appropriate, must be available for review by the voting faculty at least 48 hours preceding the vote on the personnel action.

2. Departmental Guidelines

a. Separate departmental documents are no longer required and their function can be

fulfilled by adopting the school's criteria elaborated in this document (Policy for Promotion, Appointment and Tenure and for Periodic Career Review in the University of Louisville School of Medicine) and its accompanying Appendix A. Each department may prepare written guidelines that specify additional requirements and procedures for promotion, appointment, tenure and periodic career review. Departmental documents and procedures shall not disrupt due process nor set performance requirements lower than those established in this unit document.

1. The document must be explicit in specifying the responsibilities of the appointee

and the criteria by which proficiency, excellence, and scholarship and other categories, if any, shall be measured. If factors such as professional licensing are to be included, this must be stated clearly, as well as how documentation shall be established.

2. The document must be explicit in specifying the procedures by which

consideration of promotion, appointment, tenure and periodic career reviews are conducted.

3. The document must ensure that departmental executive faculty have a major role

in departmental decisions on promotion, appointment, tenure and periodic career review.

4. The document must be approved by the unit Promotions, Appointment and

Tenure Committee and the Dean of the School of Medicine.

b. Variations from the procedures listed in Article II.K. of this document are acceptable only if the requested changes are not in conflict with the requirements of The Redbook and Minimum Guidelines and each of the following conditions are met:

1. The variations are incorporated in the written departmental guidelines and

adopted by a majority vote of departmental executive faculty.

2. In the judgment of the Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee the modifications do not affect the assurance that the departmental executive faculty will have a major role in appointment, promotion, tenure, and periodic career review decisions at the departmental level.

3. The variations are approved by the Promotions, Appointment and Tenure

Committee and the Dean of the School of Medicine.

47/121


Page 11 of 31

c. This document (Policy for Promotion, Appointment and Tenure and for Periodic Career

Review in the University of Louisville School of Medicine) is a standard document which shall be applied to those departments that have not had guidelines approved as provided in Article II.K.2.a,b.

3. Communication with Probationary Faculty Members

a. Each executive faculty member, when appointed, shall receive:

1. A written statement specifying responsibilities,

2. A copy of this document (Policy for Promotion, Appointment and Tenure and

for Periodic Career Review in the University of Louisville School of Medicine),

3. A copy of the departmental guidelines for promotion, appointment, tenure, and periodic career review, if one exists.

b. In addition to the annual review, each probationary faculty member shall receive a

periodic evaluation in writing which summarizes achievement in the areas of their work assignment and indicates whether or not progress toward promotion and/or tenure is satisfactory. At least two written evaluations of this type are required; one shall be prepared at midpoint and one when the candidate is proposed for promotion and/or tenure. The midpoint review shall be conducted at the same level or rigor and by the same process as in a tenure review, except that extramural evaluations shall not be required (The Redbook 4.2.2.G). The results of the departmental midpoint review shall be forwarded to the dean for approval. These evaluations are of particular importance and shall be made available to the Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee at the time when the faculty member is being reviewed. These evaluations are the responsibility of the departmental chair who may wish to appoint an internal promotions and tenure committee for this purpose.

c. Probationary faculty members shall be informed that only one request for evaluation for

early tenure may be made.

4. Evaluation for Tenure

a. Each faculty member eligible for tenure must ordinarily be evaluated by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee before the end of twelve months after five years of service applied to tenure (see Articles II.B.2, 3. of this document for exceptions).

b. Faculty members on probationary status shall be affected by any amendments to or

change in the criteria for tenure subsequent to their appointment. In such evaluation, appropriate consideration must be given to the amount of time remaining in their probationary period when the change becomes effective.

c. Evaluation shall originate in the department in which the faculty member has primary

appointment. The recommendations of the faculty and of the chair shall be forwarded to the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee for its recommendation to the dean, who shall make a recommendation to the provost.

d. A file of all information and documents pertinent to the tenure evaluation shall be

compiled with the cooperation of the faculty member. Recommendations and any other material added shall become part of the file. Annual work plans and reviews and all pre-tenure reviews shall be part of the evidence to be considered at the time of promotion and

48/121


Page 12 of 31

tenure reviews. The faculty member may examine any substantive material in the tenure file but shall not be informed of the identity of evaluators. The faculty member may add newly available material evidence for reconsideration by the previous evaluators or rebuttals before the file is forwarded to the provost. The evidence in this file shall be reviewed according to the procedures specified in The Redbook in the Minimum Guidelines and this personnel document.

e. The recommendation of the Dean of the School of Medicine shall be the Unit

recommendation forwarded to all higher levels of review. When a candidate is a member of the graduate faculty, the Dean of the Graduate School shall receive the case with the unit recommendation and will form a recommendation to be included in subsequent levels of review. The Vice President for Health Affairs shall review the unit recommendation (and the recommendation of the Dean of the Graduate School when appropriate) and form a recommendation to forward with the file for the provost's consideration.

5. Communication with Tenured Associate Professors

Each tenured associate professor shall receive a written annual evaluation and a periodic career

evaluation as described for all faculty (Articles I.A, II.J, and III.A).

6. Consideration at the Departmental Level

a. All recommendations for new appointments, promotions, tenure, or periodic career review shall originate in the department and require appropriate consideration by the proper committee of the executive faculty of the department:

1. A committee of all tenured members of the department shall make

recommendations on matters of tenure.

2. A committee of all other professors of the department shall make recommendations on promotions to professor and periodic career review of same.

3. A committee of all other professors and associate professors of the department

shall make recommendations for promotion to associate professor and periodic career review of same.

4. A committee of the entire executive faculty of the department shall make

recommendations for new appointments of probationary and tenured faculty members.

b. The department chair shall be responsible for making all essential arrangements for

meetings of such committees. These arrangements shall include: 1. Notifying the candidate of the nature of the materials to be assembled and

furnished to the committee and of the date when the documentation is required. The notification shall include the statement that candidates for promotion or tenure

a. May add information or documents for reconsideration by previous

levels of evaluation before the file is forwarded to the Office of the Provost, and

49/121


Page 13 of 31

b. May examine any substantive material in the file at any time prior to receipt by the Office of the Provost, but shall not be informed of the identity of the evaluators.

2. Compiling all annual work assignments and annual evaluations for the file.

3. Requesting and receiving all extramural reviews for promotion and/or tenure

and preparing a copy of each for use by the candidate after deletion of all identifying items.

4. Notifying members of the appropriate committee of the date, time and place of

the meeting, with provision of at least 48 hours for all members to study the documents in the candidate's file.

5. Providing to the committee the criteria by which candidates are to be evaluated;

these should be forwarded with the other materials to the next level of review.

6. Assembling the committee at the proper time for confidential discussion of the candidate's qualifications, which shall include any evidence of professional misconduct as well as any supporting materials that the candidate cares to submit.

7. Ensuring that the voting records of each meeting are maintained by the

department and shall include:

a. The names of faculty eligible to vote.

b. The names of those voting.

c. The results of the vote.

c. The decision of the appropriate committee as specified above in Article 6.a., made by anonymous secret ballot, shall be the departmental recommendation. Similar consideration shall be sought from other departmental executive faculty with their opinion also obtained by anonymous secret ballot.

7. Consideration by the Chair

The chair shall prepare a separate evaluation and recommendation which shall be included in the candidate's personnel file. This letter must include comments on extramural evaluations as set forth in Article II.K.10.

8. Compilation of the Personnel File

a. All documentary materials employed in the evaluation of the candidate including a copy

of the criteria used for evaluation, plus the recommendations of the department and the chair, shall be incorporated into the candidate's personnel file. The personnel file shall include the faculty work plans for the candidate covering the period under review.

b. The contents of the personnel file are the basis for evaluation at all succeeding levels of

review and must be considered confidential.

9. Consideration by the Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee

a. All recommendations for appointment or promotion to associate professor or professor, tenure, or periodic career review transmitted to the dean are forwarded to the unit

50/121


Page 14 of 31

Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee for review and recommendation. It is the responsibility of this committee to examine each recommendation for consistency with departmental guidelines and current School of Medicine policies on promotion, appointment, tenure and periodic career review.

b. In instances in which the recommendation of the department differs from that of the

department chair, the Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee shall consult with both parties and the candidate prior to making its recommendation.

c. When any disagreement concerning promotion, tenure, or periodic career review occurs

between the recommendations of the departmental faculty and the department chair; the Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee and/or the departmental faculty and the department chair; and the Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee and the dean; the succeeding review authority (i.e., the department chair; Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee; and dean; respectively) must send a written statement of the reasons for this differing recommendation to the faculty member by certified mail and to the prior reviewing authority (i.e., departmental faculty; departmental faculty and/or the department chair; and Promotion, Appointment, and Tenure Committee; respectively), each of whom shall have opportunity and time to comment in writing prior to forwarding any recommendation to the succeeding level of review.

d. The committee's recommendation is transmitted to the dean who is responsible for

preparing the unit recommendation. The Redbook Section 4.2.2.H.7. requires notification of faculty by certified mail of a negative recommendation on promotion or tenure by the appropriate vice president, dean or department chair, to allow the candidate to request a hearing before a grievance committee. In tenure cases, if the dean or chair makes a negative recommendation, the faculty member under review has ten days within which to file with the appropriate grievance committee.

10. Extramural Evaluations

a. Four extramural evaluations are required for each promotion and/or tenure review. Because evaluations during periodic career review are restricted to the School of Medicine, and personnel files do not proceed through University-wide offices, extramural letters of reference will not be required in the personnel file; intramural letters may take their place.

b. The relationship of evaluators to the University and the candidate must be clearly stated

in the chair’s evaluation along with certification of the professional expertise and objectivity (non-mentor relationship) of the evaluators. Mentors (graduate or post-graduate supervisors) are not acceptable evaluators; however, extra letters from mentors may be included in the file if clearly indicated as such.

c. Selection of reviewers -- Each candidate will be given the opportunity to suggest names

of extramural and intramural evaluators. The candidate will suggest to the chair of the department a list of six M.D., Ph.D., Ed.D., D.D.S. or J.D. (or equivalent terminal degree) evaluators. For tenure reviews or promotions of tenured faculty, the evaluators must hold faculty appointments at other universities at or above the rank for which the candidate is being considered, or be in an equivalent non-academic position. Reviews are required for the evaluation of research, creative activity, teaching, clinical service and/or community service as appropriate to the work plan. The evaluators must be well established in the candidate's field of research, teaching or clinical service and qualified to assess the quality of his/her contributions to the field. The department chair will review the appropriateness of the evaluators. The department chair may utilize these evaluators or strike names for cause (must be provided in writing and included in the promotion file) and enlist evaluators of his/her own choosing. The candidate will have the right to strike

51/121


Page 15 of 31

names from the chair’s list for cause (must be provided in writing). To ensure impartiality, disputes arising from this process will be decided by the dean.

d. The chair will solicit letters of evaluation and will collect them. Requests for evaluations

shall specify the average annual work plan for the time period under review and specify that the areas in the work plan (research, creative activity, teaching, clinical service and/or community service) are the area(s) to be reviewed.

e. Comments regarding the quality of the work under review shall be solicited (Section

IV.D.5.a of The Redbook’s Minimum Guidelines for Faculty Personnel Reviews). Evaluators will be asked to comment on whether proficiency has been demonstrated in all areas of the work assignment and whether excellence has been demonstrated in the area of greatest assignment. In the case of tenure reviews and promotion to professor of tenured faculty, they will be asked to comment on the quality of the candidate's scholarship.

f. Materials provided to the reviewers --The CV, teaching evaluations, clinical evaluations

and reprints if applicable, will be provided to evaluators. Appendix A (definitions of proficiency, excellence and scholarship) from this document shall be appended to letters requesting evaluation.

g. Recommendations regarding the advisability of awarding promotion and/or tenure shall

not be solicited since evaluators are usually not familiar with the total performance of the candidate. If such recommendations are submitted they shall be disregarded.

h. The Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee shall require a written statement

from the appropriate departmental committee indicating that it has analyzed the evaluations and has determined their validity. The candidate shall be provided an opportunity to respond in writing to the evaluation(s), and this response must be included in the review materials prior to consideration of the evaluation by any reviewing body, including the departmental committee.

11. Termination of a Review for Promotion or Early Award of Tenure

Once formally initiated the process of review for promotion or early award of tenure shall proceed through the levels described unless the candidate requests in writing that the proceedings be halted.

12. Special Procedural Considerations for Periodic Career Review

a. Committee votes and administrative recommendations regarding periodic career review shall be cast in terms of either "satisfactory" or "unsatisfactory."

b. Because evaluations during periodic career review are restricted to the School of

Medicine, and personnel files do not proceed through University-wide offices, extramural letters of reference will not be required in the personnel file, intramural letters may take their place.

c. Candidates undergoing periodic career review may examine any substantive material in

the personnel file at any time but shall not be informed of the identity of evaluators other than the department chair.

III. CONDITIONS OF FACULTY EMPLOYMENT

A. Each faculty member shall negotiate annually with the department chair a faculty work plan to be signed by

both to indicate their agreement. The annual work plan must specify percentage effort to be spent in

52/121


Page 16 of 31

teaching, research and service. Service may be further specified as community service (defined as service to the Department, School, University, Commonwealth, Region or Nation that primarily involves medical and/or basic science expertise) and as clinical service. The annual work plan shall specify the requirements for a faculty member’s presence at the University or University-affiliated facilities (Section 4.3.1.A of The Redbook). The faculty work plan shall describe specific goals and objectives to be achieved by the faculty member during the period covered.

1. For faculty in non-tenurable positions the faculty work plan shall be specific to the duties

particular to their contract periods.

2. For probationary faculty (defined in Section I.A.2. of this document) the faculty work plan shall reflect the need to demonstrate broad proficiency in the three areas of teaching, research and service in order to satisfy the requirements for the award of tenure. In addition, for probationary faculty a minimum assignment of 20% research and the corresponding time away from teaching/service obligations is required.

3. For tenured faculty, the faculty work plan shall respect both the faculty member’s need to shape

his/her career and the missions of the department, School of Medicine, and University. In order to accomplish this, the annual work plan shall permit individual faculty members to concentrate, at various times in their careers, on one or more of the areas of teaching, research and service. However, the work plan shall also allow for achieving the mission, goals, and objectives of the document.

B. For full-time faculty, The Practice Plan defines the conditions under which work outside of the University

(Section 4.3.3 of The Redbook) may be carried out for all full-time School of Medicine faculty.

C. Other conditions of faculty. i.e., leaves of absence, sabbaticals, compensation, the right to grieve employment decisions, etc., are covered in The Redbook.

Approved: August, 1984 Revised: August, 1989 Revised: June, 1990 Revised: March, 1995 Revised: November, 1995 Revised October, 1998 Revised: December, 1999 Revisions approved by School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee 4/19/2000 Revisions approved by School of Medicine Faculty Forum 5/10/2000 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 6/28/00 Following the 2001 Redbook Chapter 4 changes: Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee 6/20/01 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 11/14/01 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 01/23/02 Reviewed by Faculty Senate Redbook Committee 02/28/02 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 3/13/02 Approved by Board of Trustees 4/22/02 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee 4/16/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Rules Policies and Credentials Committee 4/24/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 5/14/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee 5/21/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 8/7/2008 Revisions approved by the Board of Trustees 12/17/08 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment, and Tenure Committee 2/16/2011

53/121


Page 17 of 31

Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 4/13/2011 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Rules, Policies, and Credentials Committee 4/21/2011 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 6/27/2011 Revisions approved by the University of Louisville Faculty Senate 10/6/2011 Revisions approved by the University of Louisville Board of Trustees 10/13/2011 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 11/17/2015 Revisions approved by the University of Louisville Faculty Senate 03/02/2016

54/121


Page 18 of 31

APPENDIX A DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES OF

PROFICIENCY, EXCELLENCE AND SCHOLARSHIP IN THE AREAS OF RESEARCH, TEACHING AND SERVICE

The contents of this appendix cannot be changed without a positive vote of the executive faculty. I. DEFINITIONS OF PROFICIENCY IN THE AREAS OF RESEARCH, TEACHING AND SERVICE

Proficiency in the areas assigned on the annual work plan is required of all faculty for contract renewal or satisfactory career reviews

1. Proficiency in Research Proficiency in research is best evidenced by regular dissemination of research findings (on

average, at least annual dissemination is expected for those with a 20% work assignment in research) the majority of which should be through traditional peer-reviewed publications. At least one peer-reviewed publication (or other evidence of dissemination of knowledge as defined in Appendix A.III.1.a) during the period under review is required for those with a research work assignment of less than 20%. Reviews by collaborators, peers and external reviewers must also be obtained and should indicate satisfactory performance compared to others at this stage of the career.

2. Proficiency in Teaching

Teaching is defined as any activity that fosters learning and critical thinking skills, including direct teaching and the creation of instructional materials to be used in one’s own teaching. Examples of direct teaching include lectures, workshops, small group facilitation, role modeling in any setting (such as ward attending), precepting, demonstration of procedural skills, facilitation of online courses and formative feedback.

Proficiency in teaching is best demonstrated by a documented teaching assignment and

satisfactory supervisory, peer, and learner (e.g., students, residents) reviews of the documented teaching activities. Reviews by peers and the recipients of the teaching efforts (i.e., students or residents) must also be obtained and should demonstrate satisfactory performance as well.

The promotion file must include the following:

a. School of Medicine Summative Peer Evaluation demonstrating satisfactory teaching

performance. b. Description of the frequency and duration of the teaching activity and the faculty

member’s role. c. Peer reviews that demonstrate satisfactory teaching performance. d. Reviews by recipients of the teaching efforts (e.g., students or residents) that demonstrate

satisfactory teaching performance. This evidence should include the number of evaluations collected and should summarize the results, including recipient comments when available.

Additional evidence of proficiency in other areas of educator activity may be included, for example engaging in structured mentoring or advising activities, developing new instructional or curricular materials, evidence of learning (e.g., analysis of learner portfolios or critical incidents or results of pre- and post-teaching assessments of learner performance) and participation in

55/121


Page 19 of 31

interdisciplinary teaching efforts. Descriptions of the quantity and quality of these educator activities should demonstrate proficiency.

3. Proficiency in Service

a. Proficiency in community service is best demonstrated by documented service and satisfactory peer and supervisory reviews of the service. Reviews by the recipients of the service or colleagues with knowledge of the service must also be obtained to document proficiency. Community service is defined as service to the Department, University, Region, Commonwealth or Nation. In order for the activities to be considered, they must involve medical and/or basic science expertise. Evidence of significantly increased clinical-service-related collaborative partnerships with the community may be presented as a supplement to the activities in service in promotion, tenure, and periodic career review consideration.

b. Proficiency in clinical service is best demonstrated by a documented clinical assignment

and satisfactory peer and supervisory reviews of the clinical service. Reviews by the recipients of the service (referring physicians, collective reviews such as patient satisfaction inventories) must also be obtained to document proficiency.

c. Proficiency in service to research is best demonstrated by a documented service to

research assignment and satisfactory peer and supervisory reviews of the service. Reviews by the recipients of the service to research (e.g., colleagues, principal and co-investigators of clinical or non-clinical research) must also be obtained to document proficiency

4. Administration

a. Administrative activities should be considered in the area to which they apply. For example, administrative responsibility for an educational activity (e.g., residency director; course director; Associate Deans for CME, GME, Curriculum) should be considered part of the teaching effort and evaluation. Administrative responsibility for a clinical activity (e.g., clinic director, clinical program director, chief of service) should be considered part of the clinical effort and evaluation. Administrative responsibility for a research activity (e.g., departmental vice chair for research, departmental research coordinator, associate dean for research) should be considered part of the research effort and evaluation.

b. Significant administrative assignments that do not fall into one of these categories, but serve a broader function (e.g., division chief, department chair, associate dean for advocacy, faculty) may be considered under the category of "service". Excellence and scholarship of this type of administrative activity may be presented as a supplement to the activities in research, teaching and/or clinical service in promotion and tenure considerations.

II. DEFINITIONS OF EXCELLENCE IN THE AREAS OF RESEARCH, TEACHING AND

SERVICE Excellence in an area of assignment that meets or exceeds 20% and is defined in the annual work plan is required of all faculty for promotion in rank.

1. Excellence in Research

a. Promotion

Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 10 pt

56/121


Page 20 of 31

Excellence in research is best demonstrated by having a major responsibility for an independent research program (e.g., principal investigator on a grant) or playing a documented leadership role in a collaborative research effort (e.g., principal investigator on a multi-principal investigator grant). To demonstrate this, regular publication (on average at least annually) in peer-reviewed media for which the faculty member is a major author (defined as first, senior [i.e., the person who directed the research], or corresponding author is required.) The successful acquisition of patents is considered evidence of peer acceptance, although dissemination in peer-reviewed media is preferred and must constitute the majority of the documentation of peer acceptance. An independent research program requires current extramural funding; federal funding support as principal investigator including principal investigator on a multi-principal investigator grant is preferred. Alternatively, nationally peer-reviewed funding as principal investigator will be acceptable if evidence for recent submission and resubmission to federal sources is provided or it can be documented that federal funding is generally unavailable for a specific research area. Entrepreneurial research funding is best evidenced by a faculty member having a leadership role in acquiring federal peer-reviewed grants or contracts for technology development linked to UofL and of demonstrable value to the University. Reviews of the research via extramural letters must be obtained and should support the rating of excellence.

b. Promotion to Professor

In addition to the criteria specified in this Appendix Section II.1.a., for promotion to professor based on excellence in research, annual publication as major author will suffice only if the journal is objectively documented by the department to be a high quality, high visibility journal in the field. In addition, for promotion to professor based on excellence in research, sustained, renewed, federal funding as principal investigator will be required. If it can be documented that federal funding is generally unavailable for a specific research area, the preferential requirement may be fulfilled through substantial national peer-reviewed funding.

2. Excellence in Teaching a. Promotion

Excellence in teaching is best demonstrated by a documented substantial teaching assignment with a major responsibility for (i.e., leadership role in) a teaching program.

The promotion file must include the following:

1. School of Medicine Summative Peer Evaluation demonstrating excellent

teaching performance. 2. Description of the frequency and duration of the teaching activity and the faculty

member’s role. 3. Peer reviews that demonstrate excellent teaching performance. 4. Reviews by recipients of the teaching efforts (e.g., students or residents) that

demonstrate excellent teaching performance. This evidence should include the number of evaluations collected and should summarize the results, including recipient comments when available.

57/121


Page 21 of 31

5. Description of the faculty member’s major responsibility for a teaching program, including concise descriptions of the frequency and duration of the responsibility, outcomes, and evaluations of those outcomes.

Additional evidence of excellence in other areas of educator activity may be included, for example, receiving an award for teaching, engaging in structured mentoring or advising activities, developing new instructional or curricular materials, evidence of learning and critical thinking skills (e.g., analysis of learner portfolios or critical incidents or results of pre- and post-teaching assessments of learner performance) and participation in interdisciplinary teaching efforts. Descriptions of the quantity and quality of these educator activities should demonstrate excellence.


In addition to the criteria specified in this Appendix Section II.2.a, for promotion to professor based on excellence in teaching, extra-university leadership in teaching, curriculum development, advising/mentoring, educational leadership/administration, or learner assessment must be demonstrated. Examples of how this can be demonstrated are via the scholarship of teaching as described in this Appendix Section III.3 or participation in extramural educational initiatives (examples: election or appointment to regional or national committees involved with teaching, curriculum development, advising/mentoring, educational leadership/administration, or learner assessment; invitations as a visiting professor for teaching activity; convening/chairing a national or regional conference focused on education; invitations to critically appraise or evaluate an educational activity at another institution; participation in subspecialty board review or test development committee; invitation to be an accreditation [ACGME or LCME] site visitor).

3. Excellence in Service a. Promotion

Excellence in clinical service is best demonstrated by a documented clinical assignment and a major responsibility for (i.e., leadership role in) a clinical program. The clinician should have measurably and significantly improved the clinical program. Measures of improvement include obtaining funding support for the program through contracts, significantly increased revenues, or new patient referrals; evidence of significantly increased clinical-service-related collaborative partnerships with the community; evidence of improved health care outcomes, evidence of significantly increased cost effectiveness of the program (for example, improved clinic efficiencies); introduction of new technologies, methods or procedures that contribute to improved health care outcomes; or evidence of a significant contribution to improved public health. Peer and supervisory reviews of the clinical service must be obtained and should support the rating of excellence. Reviews by the recipients of the service (for example colleagues, referring physicians or collective reviews such as patient satisfaction inventories) must also be obtained and should support the rating of excellence.


In addition to the criteria specified in this Appendix Section II.3.a, for promotion to professor based on excellence in clinical service, extra-university leadership in clinical service must be demonstrated. Examples of how this could be demonstrated are via scholarship as described in this Appendix Section III.4 or participation in extramural clinical initiatives (examples: election to national committees, invitations as a visiting professor for clinical activity, participation in subspecialty board review or test

58/121


Page 22 of 31

development committee, invitation to be an accreditation [ACGME or LCME] site visitor).

c. Community Service

Excellence in community service is not ordinarily acceptable as the basis for promotion. However, serving on labor-intensive committees such as the Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects (IRB), Student Admissions Committee, or Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee could be used to augment the case for a successful promotional review that is otherwise marginal.

d. Service to Research Promotion

Excellence in service to research is best demonstrated by a documented service-to-research assignment and a major responsibility for (i.e., leadership role) in a clinical or non-clinical research program. The individual should have measurably and significantly improved the research program. Measures of improvement include a significant participation in obtaining funding for the program through contracts or grants, development of new research programs, or increased research productivity of the program including scientific presentations and nationally-recognized (e.g., included in PubMed) peer-reviewed publications. Peer and supervisory reviews of the candidate’s service to research must be obtained and should support the rating of excellence. Reviews by the recipients of the service (e.g., colleagues, principal and co-investigators of clinical or non-clinical research) must be obtained and should support the rating of excellence.

e. Promotion to Professor

For promotion to professor based on service to research, extra-university recognition in service to research must be demonstrated. Examples of how this could be demonstrated are via scholarship as described in Appendix A, Section III.4.d. Also meeting this criteria are critical participation on multi-site (regional, national, international) funded projects and participation in national peer-review of research

III. DEFINITIONS OF SCHOLARSHIP IN THE AREAS OF RESEARCH, TEACHING AND SERVICE Required of all probationary (pre-tenure) and tenured faculty for promotion in rank 1. Introduction

Scholarship is defined herein as the creation of new knowledge and the dissemination and

acceptance of it by peers. Tenure is awarded to those who have an independent, focused, self-sustaining program of scholarship or a leadership role in a focused, self-sustaining program of collaborative scholarship. In any given area, the requirements for scholarship exceed those for proficiency in that the scholar plays a pivotal role in the creation of new knowledge and assumes primary responsibility for its dissemination.

a. Examples of ways to demonstrate peer acceptance of disseminated scholarship:

Journal articles, papers on pedagogic issues, review articles, case reports, clinical

outcomes studies, educational outcomes studies, electronic dissemination (e.g., computer programs, CD-ROM, videos, web-based), textbooks, book chapters, technology transfer, development of new protocols that are widely accepted, development of teaching tools, curricula or curricular models, study guides, computer-aided tools, new evaluation methodologies, well subscribed faculty development programs, workbooks adopted by other institutions and development of patents.

Formatted: Indent: Left: 1"

Formatted: Font: 10 pt

Formatted: Indent: Left: 1"




59/121


Page 23 of 31

b. Funding also supports peer acceptance and is necessary for sustaining the program of

scholarship. Sources include but are not limited to research grants, training grants, clinical contracts, investigational drug studies, funded teaching initiatives, or cooperative industry agreements.

c. The majority of the documentation of peer acceptance should be through traditional peer-

review publications. d. Scholarship need only be demonstrated in one area for tenure and/or promotion on tenure

track. 2. Demonstration of Scholarship in the Area of Research a. Promotion

In order to demonstrate the scholarship of research, innovations in research (discovery of new findings or application of existing findings in a new fashion) are expected, as is the dissemination and peer acceptance of them. Although other acceptable venues are listed in this Appendix Section III.1.a., the majority of the documentation of peer acceptance must be through traditional peer-review publications. Scholarship of research must also be demonstrated by an extramurally funded research program. The individual must also present research findings on average annually at national forums. At the time of tenure review, the individual must have an emerging regional/national recognition in a focused area of research expertise that should be evidenced in extramural letters.


At the time of review for professor, in addition to the requirements of this Appendix Section III.2.a., the individual must have national/international recognition in a focused area of research expertise that is demonstrated by such evidence as leadership roles in national forums, consultations such as being an editor or reviewer, or invitations to speak. The national/international recognition should be evidenced in extramural letters.

3. Demonstration of Scholarship in the Area of Teaching a. Promotion

In order to demonstrate scholarship of teaching, innovations in teaching (i.e., development of new methodologies or application of existing methodologies in a new way) , curriculum, student advising/mentoring, leadership/administration, or student assessment are expected annually, as is the dissemination and peer acceptance of them. Although other acceptable venues are listed in this Appendix Section III.1.a., the majority of the documentation of peer acceptance must be through traditional peer-review publications not limited to the area of teaching. Scholarship of teaching must also be demonstrated by securing funds for teaching/educator activities through an intramural or extramural peer-reviewed process. The individual must present instructional innovations/findings on average annually at national forums. At the time of tenure review, the individual must have an emerging regional/national recognition in a focused area of teaching or educator activity that is supported by extramural letters.


At the time of review for professor, in addition to the requirements of this Appendix Section III.3.a., the individual must have national/international recognition in a focused area of teaching or educator activity, which is demonstrated by such evidence as

60/121


Page 24 of 31

leadership roles in national forums, consultations at other universities, serving as a reviewer or editor, or invitations to speak. The national/international recognition should be evidenced in extramural letters.

4. Demonstration of Scholarship in the Area of Service

a. Promotion

In order to demonstrate scholarship of clinical service, innovations in clinical service (development of new protocols, new clinical programs or the expansion of existing programs) are expected annually and the acceptance of them and the dissemination of them through peer-review mechanisms are required. Although other acceptable venues are listed in this Appendix Section III.1.a., the majority of the documentation of peer acceptance must be through traditional peer-review publications not limited to the area of clinical service. Scholarship of clinical service must also be demonstrated by extramurally funded clinical initiatives or research efforts. The individual must present clinical innovations/findings on average annually in a national forum. At the time of tenure review, the individual must have an emerging regional/national recognition in a focused area of clinical expertise that should be evidenced in extramural letters.


At the time of review for professor, in addition to the requirements of this Appendix Section III.4.a., the individual must have national/international recognition in a focused area of clinical expertise that is demonstrated by such evidence as leadership roles in national forums, or invitations to speak nationally or internationally. The national/international recognition should be evidenced in extramural letters. With respect to participation in clinical trials, there should be evidence of a leadership role.

c. Scholarship of community service is not likely to serve as the basis for a successful tenure review or promotional review on tenure track.

d. Scholarship in service to research includes:

1. innovations in service to research (development of new protocols, new research programs, or the expansion of existing programs)

2. demonstration of peer acceptance through traditional peer-review publications documenting contributions to clinical initiatives or research efforts

3. presentations of research findings, on average, annually in a national forum

4. for tenure review: emerging regional/national recognition for expertise in a focused area of service to research that is evidenced in extramural letters

5. for promotion to professor: national/international recognition for expertise in a focused area of service to research that is evidenced in extramural letters

IV. DEFINITION OF SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY Scholarly activity must be demonstrated regularly (i.e., on average annually) for a satisfactory periodic career review for tenured faculty and is also required for promotion of non-tenurable faculty to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor. 1. Introduction


Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5", Tab stops: Not at 1.5"


Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5", Tab stops: 1.88", Left + Notat 1.5"



Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5"



Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.25", Hanging: 0.5"



61/121


Page 25 of 31

Scholarly activity is defined herein as those activities in which faculty take a scholarly approach to education, clinical, and/or research activities. These occur when faculty systematically design, implement, access or redesign educational, clinical, or research activities, drawing from the scientific literature and ”best practices” in the field. Documentation describes how the activity was informed by the literature and/or best practices. Scholarly activities that occur over more than a single year (12 month period) may be counted more than once if there is significant on-going or new effort that takes place in each year (e.g., development of a curriculum in one year, analysis of outcomes/impact data in another). Repeating the same lecture or set of lectures without documentation of on-going evidence or evaluation-based revision would not be considered a multi-year scholarly activity. Multiple faculty members with involvement in a single scholarly activity may receive credit for the activity provided the individual faculty member can provide documentation of substantial contribution to the activity. 2. Examples of scholarly activity include but are not limited to the following: a. Scholarship as defined in Appendix A.III.I b. Substantial contribution to a local or national clinical trial (patient recruitments, data collection, other documentable contributions that are important but do not result in authorship) c. Service as a board reviewer or writing board review questions d. Active service on a regional or national committee or a board related to clinical care, education, or research e. Intramural or extramural funding for a clinical or educational project f. Leadership role in a local, regional, or national conference or in a multidisciplinary intramural conference on education or clinical care g. Evidence-based development or revision of organizational policy h. Poster or oral presentation at a local, regional, or national meeting i. Incorporation of new teaching technology or an evidence-based educational module into a curriculum j. Leadership or substantial role in a quality improvement project that documents effectiveness or leads to improved processes, clinical care, or outcomes k. Leadership role in the development or revision of evidence-based clinical practice procedures, guidelines, or treatment algorithms (e.g., order sets) l. Evidence-based consultation to public officials at community, regional, state, or national venues Approved by School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee 4/19/2000 Approved by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 5/10/2000 Approved by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 6/28/00 Approved by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 11/14/01 Approved by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 01/23/02 Reviewed by Faculty Senate Redbook Committee 02/28/02 Approved by Board of Trustees 4/22/02 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee 4/16/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Rules Policies and Credentials Committee 4/24/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 5/14/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee 5/21/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 8/7/2008

Revisions approved by the Board of Trustees 12/17/08 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment, and Tenure Committee 2/16/2011 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 4/13/2011 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Rules, Policies, and Credentials Committee 4/21/2011 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 6/27/2011

62/121


Page 26 of 31

Revisions approved by the University of Louisville Faculty Senate 10/6/2011 Revisions approved by the University of Louisville Board of Trustees 10/13/2011 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Faculty 05/11/2015 Revisions approved by the University of Louisville Faculty Senate 03/02/2016

63/121


Page 27 of 31

APPENDIX B POLICY ON THE APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, RETENTION AND RECOGNITION

OF GRATIS FACULTY AT UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

I. GENERAL STATEMENT

Evaluation of a candidate’s qualifications for appointment to the University of Louisville School of Medicine as gratis faculty will consider the candidate’s commitment to the School’s teaching or research missions, maintenance of professional competency and licensure, and maintenance of a positive personal profile. Reappointments and promotions are based on demonstrated and documented contributions to the School’s mission. All gratis faculty must adhere to the standards set forth in ethics documents and statements issued by the School and the University. These include, for animal experimentation, an obligation of all members using their affiliation to seek research funds or research opportunities to process their clearances and assurances through the University of Louisville Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC). Gratis faculty not complying with this requirement will lose their affiliation immediately.

II. SPECIFIC CRITERIA

The individual who wishes to be appointed as a gratis faculty member in the University of Louisville School of Medicine must meet the following criteria (described in more detail in this Appendix Section VI.A.):

A. A commitment to actively participate in the teaching mission of the School of Medicine with

medical students, nursing students, residents, fellows, or other health profession students

-or-

A commitment to actively participate in the research mission of the School of Medicine through collaboration with at least one full-time faculty member in research or serving on the Institutional Review Board (IRB).

B. Maintaining a clinical license in good standing in disciplines where appropriate.

C. Maintaining a personal profile that positively reflects the University of Louisville School of

Medicine.

Reappointment and promotion depends upon demonstrating that these criteria have been fulfilled through the candidate’s activity for the School.

III. APPOINTMENT

A. Gratis faculty appointments may be at one of four ranks: For Clinical Department Faculty: For Basic Science Department Faculty:

Clinical Instructor Adjunct Instructor Assistant Clinical Professor Adjunct Assistant Professor Associate Clinical Professor Adjunct Associate Professor Clinical Professor Adjunct Professor

B. Gratis faculty appointments are non-tenurable and must be based in departments. Consideration for appointment will begin with the submission of a completed application to the appropriate administrative office.

64/121


Page 28 of 31

C. A cover letter soliciting a letter of reference from the department chair must accompany the application. This letter of reference and a positive faculty vote is required for consideration for gratis faculty appointment. The letter of reference must include how the faculty member will contribute to the teaching and/or research missions of the School.

D. It is anticipated that most new gratis faculty candidates will request appointment at the rank of

clinical instructor/adjunct instructor or assistant clinical professor/adjunct assistant professor for those with board certification or Ph.D.’s with post-doctoral experience. If the prospective gratis faculty member has served as full-time faculty or gratis faculty of higher rank at this or another university prior to joining the University of Louisville medical community then the prospective faculty member may apply for a position of higher rank. When applying for a higher rank the prospective faculty member will provide documentation of his/her activities at the prior medical center that warrant the higher rank position. Furthermore, a letter of recommendation from a faculty member of the program in which the candidate had an affiliation should attest to the candidate’s performance and qualifications pertaining to the higher rank. Appointment at advanced rank (defined as associate clinical professor/adjunct associate professor or higher) requires review by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee.

E. The term of initial appointments will be at the discretion of the department chair but may not

exceed: Clinical Instructor / Adjunct Instructor Three years Assistant Clinical Professor / Adjunct Assistant Professor Five years Associate Clinical Professor / Adjunct Associate Professor Five years Clinical Professor / Adjunct Professor Five years

Reappointment at the same rank is possible and is described in the Appendix section IV.

The application for appointment, ballot, letter of reference from the department chair and any other supporting documents will be reviewed by the Dean of the School of Medicine and the Vice President for Health Affairs for recommendation and thereafter transmittal to the University Provost and Board of Trustees.

IV. REAPPOINTMENT:

A. The term of appointment to gratis faculty is time limited. Notice should be sent to the faculty member by the department approximately one year prior to the expiration date of the current appointment; however, it is the responsibility of the gratis faculty member to apply for reappointment six months prior to the expiration date of his/her current appointment in order to ensure continuity of appointment.

B. Reappointment will be made to the gratis faculty for the same maximum terms delineated above

for initial appointments. Reappointments originate in the department and are reviewed and recommended to the University Provost by the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs.

V. PROMOTION

A. Application for promotion should be made by the gratis faculty member six months prior to the time the current appointment is to be reviewed. The faculty member should return the completed application with a letter requesting consideration for promotion. Department chairs can also initiate promotion considerations.

B. Promotion in the gratis faculty track will be sequential and determined by the duration of

involvement and demonstration that the specific criteria in this Appendix Section II have been met.

65/121


Page 29 of 31

C. The standard minimum time the gratis faculty member will serve at the appointed rank prior to applying for promotion is as follows: Clinical Instructor/Adjunct Instructor and Assistant Clinical Professor/Adjunct Assistant Professor (combined): Five years (for promotion to Associate Clinical Professor/Adjunct Associate Professor)

Associate Clinical Professor/Adjunct Associate Professor: Five years (for promotion to Clinical Professor/Adjunct Professor)

Early promotions based on exceptional contributions are possible.

D. Promotion from clinical instructor/adjunct instructor to assistant clinical professor/adjunct

assistant professor may be done any time but requires board certification in disciplines where applicable. If the candidate is not a clinician, promotion to assistant clinical professor requires that he/she must have attained the highest degree possible in their respective discipline and have had academic post-doctoral experience.

E. Promotion to associate clinical professor/adjunct associate professor will require documentation of

contributions to the School during the time in rank, including teaching and/or research activities.

1. For documentation of teaching, evidence of quantity and quality must be provided and should be sufficiently substantial and of sufficient quality as to warrant promotion. Submitted evidence should include a summary of the specific teaching activities and evaluations of the teaching effort by recipients of the effort and by peers.

2. For documentation of research, evidence of collaborative research productivity with at least

one full-time faculty member must be submitted and should be of sufficient quantity and quality as to warrant promotion. Evidence should include joint presentations, dissemination of the research effort through publications or other media, and/or successful grant applications.

F. Promotion to clinical professor/adjunct professor will require an exceptional effort on the part of

the gratis faculty candidate. The effort should significantly exceed those for promotion to associate clinical professor/adjunct associate professor.

G. A positive faculty vote, a positive department chair letter, two intramural letters and two

extramural letters are required for promotion. Letters should attest to the nature, quantity and quality of the candidate’s contributions to the School’s mission during the time in rank. In addition to the review required for new appointment to advanced rank, the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee must review and recommend promotions to the ranks of associate clinical professor/adjunct associate professor and higher.

H. At the time of retirement, the gratis faculty member that has achieved advanced rank (associate

clinical professor/adjunct associate professor or clinical professor/adjunct professor) may be given an emeritus gratis faculty position at the highest rank attained.

VI. CRITERIA FOR GRATIS FACULTY REAPPOINTMENT

A. The following describes in more detail the criteria for gratis faculty status and the way that each should be documented at the time of reappointment.

1. Active participation in the teaching mission of the School of Medicine with medical

students, nursing students, residents, fellows, or other health profession students. The candidate must provide evidence of the quantity and quality of the teaching activity

66/121


Page 30 of 31

during the previous appointment period, including teaching evaluations. Examples of contributions to the teaching mission are:

a. Service as an attending physician on an inpatient teaching service

b. Preceptorship for medical students or residents in the office setting

c. Instructional involvement in departmental clinics or affiliated hospital based

clinics d. Didactic lectures

e. Regular participation in departmental educational services f. Regular participation in interdisciplinary teaching efforts g. Mentoring or advising activities

-or-

Active participation in the research mission of the School of Medicine through collaboration with at least one full-time faculty member in research or serving on the Institutional Review Board (IRB). This must be documented by a letter from the chair of the IRB or a full-time faculty collaborator and reflected in joint presentations, publications or grant applications.

2. Maintaining a license in good standing in disciplines where appropriate.

3. Maintaining a personal profile that positively reflects the University of Louisville School of Medicine. The reputation of the School is dependent upon the reputation of its faculty. It is imperative the faculty members are of the highest professional character and adhere to the written standards of the School.

VII. TERMINATION OF APPOINTMENT

A. Recommendation of termination prior to the end of the appointed term should be forwarded to the Dean for review and recommendation to the University Provost and the Board of Trustees.

B. Justification must include refusal to comply with the requirements and criteria set forth in this

document or inactivity when asked to comply.

C. Non-renewal at the end of the appointed term is at the discretion of the faculty and the department chair and may be done without cause.

As recommended by School of Medicine Medical Council 11/20/00 As recommended by School of Medicine Faculty Forum 02/14/01 As recommended by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 07/30/01 As recommended by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 11/14/01 Approved by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 01/23/02 Reviewed by Faculty Senate Redbook Committee 02/28/02 Approved by Board of Trustees 04/22/02 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee 4/16/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Rules Policies and Credentials Committee 4/24/2008

67/121


Page 31 of 31

Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Faculty Forum 5/14/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Promotion, Appointment and Tenure Committee 5/21/2008 Revisions approved by the School of Medicine Executive Faculty 8/7/2008

Revisions approved by the Board of Trustees 12/17/08

68/121


CONCERNING THE COLLEGE OF BUSINESS

PERSONNEL DOCUMENT



RECOMMENDATION:

The Acting President recommends that the Board of Trustees approve the revised College

of Business Personnel Document in the form attached to be effective immediately.

(Revisions on pages 1, 11, 12, and 25 of 25)

BACKGROUND:

These revisions were approved by the College of Business Faculty and the Faculty




Passed: ___________ Passed: ___________


Other: ____________ Other: ____________

_____________________________ __________________________________

Secretary Secretary

69/121

1

University of Louisville College of Business

PERSONNEL DOCUMENT Approved April 24, 2012December 9, 2014

This document establishes the personnel policy for the College of Business in accordance with The Redbook. The faculty accepts responsibility for participation in the governing of themselves in matters relating to selection (appointment), development, evaluation, merit, tenure, and promotion. The faculty includes all personnel appointed as probationary or tenured faculty as defined by the College of Business (COB) bylaws. The goal of this document is to foster the professional growth of the faculty of the COB to meet the mission of the College. It follows that excellence in the faculty will ensure excellence in the education of our students. This document will be the only personnel document in the College of Business.

70/121

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREAMBLE ................................................................................................................................... 3

ARTICLE 1 Faculty Appointments and Tenure ............................................................................. 4

Section 1.1 Types of Appointments ..................................................................................... 4

Section 1.2 Selection (Appointment) – Probationary and Permanent Tenure Faculty ......... 4

Section 1.3. Selection (Appointment) Term Faculty ............................................................. 4

Section 1.4. Selection (Appointment) - Part-time or Adjunct Faculty .................................. 6

Section 1.5 Criteria for Tenure ............................................................................................. 6

Section 1.6 Criteria for Appointment and/or Promotion: Probationary and Tenured .......... 7

ARTICLE 2 Faculty Personnel Reviews ........................................................................................ 8

Section 2.1 Annual Reviews ................................................................................................. 8

Section 2.2 Tenure/Promotion Review ..................................................................................... 10

Section 2.3 Pre-Tenure Reviews ............................................................................................... 13

Section 2.4 Periodic Career Reviews ........................................................................................ 14

Section 2.5 Grievance Procedures ............................................................................................ 16

Section 2.6 Personnel Committee ............................................................................................. 16

ARTICLE 3 Conditions of Faculty Employment ......................................................................... 16

Section 3.1 Annual Work Plan.................................................................................................. 16

Section 3.2 Presence at the University ...................................................................................... 16

Section 3.3 Work Outside the University ................................................................................. 17

APPENDIX A Annual Review Guidelines................................................................................... 18

Section A-1 Teaching .......................................................................................................... 18

Section A-2 Research and scholarly activity ....................................................................... 19

Section A-3 Service ............................................................................................................. 22

Section A-4 Adherence to Professional Standards .............................................................. 23

Section A-5 Collaboration with Colleagues and Students ................................................... 24

Section A-6 Overall Evaluation ........................................................................................... 24

Section A-7 Merit-based Salary Increase (MBSI) ............................................................... 24

APPENDIX B Criteria for Evaluating Teaching .......................................................................... 25

71/121

3

PREAMBLE Principles inherent in this document are: The selection and development of the best-qualified individuals are essential to achieving the desired outcomes established by the COB. We value and respect diverse viewpoints and cherish vigorous academic debate. Vigorous debate should never infringe on the atmosphere of collegiality important to building a great organization. We value cultural and intellectual diversity. We will focus on continuous improvement in all activities. Faculty development and achievement will be consistent with the mission, goals, and objectives of the COB, while at the same time allowing faculty to work toward their individual professional goals. In a rapidly changing and increasingly competitive environment, flexibility of programs and faculty resources is primary to meeting the needs of and providing quality service to the stakeholders of the COB. Probationary full-time faculty shall focus on teaching and research. The concentration and distribution of the faculty's intellectual activities in teaching, research, and service shall be consistent with the mission of the COB. The personnel policy is designed to ensure comparable rigor, risk, and reward among the faculty within the COB. Within the framework of the mission, diversity of intellectual pursuit should be the cornerstone of the faculty. No two faculty members are exactly alike. Each person has different strengths and weaknesses. It is the policy of the COB to build on the strengths of each faculty member and to support improvement in areas of weakness. Although we affirm faculty diversity, some mandates are appropriate. All faculty members who hold the rank of Assistant Professor or above should establish their credentials as researchers. Every scholar must demonstrate the capability to do original research of a targeted quality consistent with the university’s mission as a “premier metropolitan research university.” Remaining current in his or her teaching field is a minimum level of performance for all faculty members. This may be accomplished in a variety of ways, including publication directly related to his or her teaching fields on a regular basis. Faculty output must be carefully assessed. All activities must be measured by the yardstick of excellence. The faculty of the College of Business is committed to the highest standards of professional integrity - in their teaching, their research, their service, and their dealings with each other and the community at large. Universities, more than any other secular institution, must hold truthfulness and openness as the highest of virtues. Faculty must be models for students.

72/121

4

ARTICLE 1 Faculty Appointments and Tenure

Section 1.1 Types of Appointments The COB will allow appointments as specified under Redbook Sections 4.1.1 through 4.1.4 or as otherwise specified in the document.

Section 1.2 Selection (Appointment) – Probationary and Permanent Tenure Faculty

A. Recruiting Once a faculty position is approved, the responsibility for recruitment and selection rests with the appropriate department or school of the COB. The director, chair, or other appropriate administrative officer is responsible for submitting the recruitment plan to the Dean. Faculty members are expected to serve on screening committees and participate in interviews and other recruiting activities. The Dean or an associate dean must interview all candidates. Appropriate efforts shall be made to recruit a diverse faculty.

B. Appointment Process A majority of the discipline(s) tenured and probationary faculty must endorse a candidate for appointment before the school director, department chair, or appropriate unit administrative officer submits a recommendation to the Dean. The school director, department chair, or appropriate administrative officer of the unit is responsible for preparing a file for the candidate before an offer letter is sent by the Dean. The file must contain a verification of official credentials and evidence of personal reference checks, along with the recommendation of the director, chair, or appropriate administrative officer.

C. Appointment at Associate or Full Professor and /or with tenure In the event a candidate is forwarded to the Dean for appointment for a rank higher than assistant professor or with tenure, the appointment file must be accompanied by a recommendation from the COB Personnel Committee.

D. Endowed Chairs or Named Professors A recommendation by the COB Personnel Committee must be part of the file forwarded to the Dean for all appointments, or reappointments, to any endowed chair or named professorship in the COB. Reappointments shall be considered by the Personnel Committee only after review and recommendation by the departmental faculty. Endowed chair and professorship appointments will be reviewed for possible reappointment every 5 years at the time of the Periodic Career Review.

Section 1.3. Selection (Appointment) Term Faculty

A. Recruiting Once a faculty position is approved, the responsibility for recruitment and selection rests with the appropriate department or school of the COB. The director, chair, or other appropriate administrative officer is responsible for submitting the recruitment plan to the Dean. Faculty members are expected to serve on screening committees

73/121

5

B. Appointment Process A majority of the discipline(s) tenured and probationary faculty must endorse a candidate for appointment before the school director, department chair, or appropriate unit administrative officer submits a recommendation to the Dean. The school director, department chair, or appropriate administrative officer of the unit is responsible for preparing a file for the candidate before an offer letter is sent by the Dean. The file must contain a verification of official credentials and evidence of personal reference checks, along with the recommendation of the director, chair, or appropriate administrative officer. Term appointments will be made at the appropriate level as specified in Section 1.3.D. Endowed Chairs.

A recommendation by the COB Personnel Committee must be part of the file forwarded to the Dean for all appointments, or reappointments, to any endowed chair or named professorship in the COB. Reappointments shall be considered by the Personnel Committee only after review and recommendation by the departmental faculty. Endowed chair and professorship appointments will be reviewed for possible reappointment at the time of review of contract renewal.

Criterion for Appointment and Promotion Term Instructor. Persons appointed to the rank of term instructor must have completed at least the requirements of the master's degree. Normally they should be able to demonstrate professional experience relevant to the area of the teaching assignment, significant in duration and level of responsibility and current at the time of the appointment. They must also show promise of proficiency in teaching and promise of meeting the COB standards in service. Term Assistant Professor. Persons appointed as or promoted to the rank of term assistant professor shall hold the appropriate terminal degree in their field of specialization or show that the terminal degree is highly likely to be awarded within one year of the appointment. They must show promise of proficiency in teaching. They must also show promise of meeting the COB standards in service. Term Associate Professor. Persons appointed as or promoted to the rank of term associate professor must normally have served a minimum of six years in rank as an assistant professor or term assistant professor. At the time of the review process, candidates must demonstrate that they are proficient in teaching (meet benchmark standards of the COB), are proficient in research, and meet the minimum performance standards in service. They must also show continuing promise of meeting the COB standards in teaching and service. Cooperation with colleagues, respect for students, support of COB and school or department programs and activities, personal conduct and integrity are also important dimensions to be considered when making promotion decisions. Term Professor. At the time of the review process, the candidate must demonstrate accomplishments substantially beyond that required to obtain the rank of term associate professor and must show promise of continuing accomplishments. Candidates for the rank of term professor must demonstrate the achievement of excellence in teaching

74/121

6

(judged by COB standards) and service and proficiency in research. Evidence of accomplishments as a teaching, research, and service role model for junior faculty is expected. Cooperation with colleagues, respect for students, support of COB and school or department programs and activities, personal conduct and integrity will also affect a candidate's case for promotion.

Section 1.4. Selection (Appointment) - Part-time or Adjunct Faculty

A. Recruiting Part-time and adjunct candidates are to be identified through a review of part-time faculty currently or previously employed by the COB; potential part-time faculty listings maintained on file; recommendations from faculty within the department; a local search or advertisement process or other comparable means. Appropriate efforts shall be made to recruit a diverse faculty.

B. Appointment Process The candidate for a part-time or adjunct appointment shall provide appropriate credentials including but not limited to a copy of a vita/resume, documentation of relevant professional credentials and an original transcript of the highest degree earned. The director, chair, or appropriate administrative officer shall review these credentials. Faculty with adjunct appointments will have the qualifications of probationary and tenured faculty in the COB. The non-adjunct, part-time appointment will be as a lecturer. Where the non-adjunct, part-time candidate does not have academic and/or professional credentials comparable to those of probationary or tenured faculty within the COB, the director, chair, or appropriate administrative officer shall provide a justification for a waiver of these requirements to the Associate Dean. The Associate Dean shall review and approve requests for the hiring of part-time and adjunct faculty, including any requests for a waiver of the requirement for comparable credentials. Copies of the credentials of all part-time faculty for the current academic year shall be maintained in the Dean’s office.

C. Evaluation Part-time faculty shall be reviewed annually by the department chair, director or appropriate administrator. A copy of the evaluation will be provided the faculty and a copy forwarded to the Dean. Contracts of part-time or adjunct faculty evaluated to be unsatisfactory will not be renewed.

Section 1.5 Criteria for Tenure At the time of the review process, candidates for tenure at the associate professor rank must show a promise of excellence in research (defined as a record and projected future path of research accomplishment that, if continued, can reasonably lead to an assessment of excellence at the time of review for promotion to full professor), they must demonstrate proficiency (meet benchmark standards of the COB) in teaching, and they must meet minimum performance standards in service. Candidates for tenure at the rank of full professor must demonstrate excellence in either teaching or research and proficiency in the other; or above average performance in both teaching and research.

75/121

7

Proficiency in teaching will be judged by a review of the factors and criteria listed in Appendix A, Sections A-1.3 and A-1.4. An assessment of research quality will normally reflect the types of demonstration works described in Appendix A Sections A-2.2 through A-2.4. Quality as well as quantity of publications will be evaluated. Consideration must be given to the research quality standards established in the department of the candidate and the College. The minimum standards in service are defined in Appendix A Section A-3. A candidate must further show promise of continuing to make a positive contribution to the mission of his or her school or department and the COB. Adherence to professional standards is expected. Cooperation with colleagues, respect for students, support of COB and school or department programs and activities, personal conduct, and integrity are also important dimensions to be considered when making tenure decisions. Completion of the probationary period with satisfactory annual performance evaluations and pre-tenure review shall not in and of itself constitute sufficient grounds for tenure. The tenure decision is one of the most important decisions made by the university because it carries with it a long-term financial commitment of the institution. Great universities are built on the foundation of great faculties of teacher-scholars. The long-term needs and interests of the University and the College of Business are paramount in tenure decisions. Accordingly, it is important to apply high standards when making tenure decisions. A candidate for an early tenure review (as defined under Article 1 Section 2.2) must demonstrate accomplishment at a level that is expected for tenure, as described above.

Section 1.6 Criteria for Appointment and/or Promotion: Probationary and Tenured In addition to the following minimum guidelines, consideration for promotion will include adherence to professional standards, personal conduct and integrity. The promotion recommendation reflects professional achievement and contribution toward the mission and goals of the school or department and the COB. Increasing rigor is expected as faculty members advance through the academic ranks. Instructor. Persons appointed to the rank of instructor must have completed at least the requirements of the master's degree. Normally they should be able to demonstrate professional experience relevant to the area of the teaching assignment, significant in duration and level of responsibility and current at the time of the appointment. They must also show promise of proficiency in teaching and promise of meeting the COB standards in service. Assistant Professor. Persons appointed as or promoted to the rank of assistant professor shall hold the appropriate terminal degree in their field of specialization or show that the terminal degree is highly likely to be awarded within one year of the appointment. They must show promise of proficiency in teaching and research. They must also show promise of meeting the COB standards in service. Associate Professor. Persons appointed as or promoted to the rank of associate professor must normally have served a minimum of six years in rank as an assistant professor. At the time of the review process, candidates must demonstrate that they are proficient in teaching (meet benchmark standards of the COB), and meet the minimum performance standards in service. They must show a promise of excellence in research. Evidence must be presented to demonstrate ongoing, high quality research activity in the development and demonstration

76/121

8

phases as shown in Appendix A Section A-2.3. Consideration must be given to the research quality standards established in the department of the candidate and the College. They must also show continuing promise of meeting the COB standards in service. Cooperation with colleagues, respect for students, support of COB and school or department programs and activities, personal conduct and integrity are also important dimensions to be considered when making tenure decisions. Professor. At the time of the review process, the candidate must demonstrate accomplishments substantially beyond that required to obtain the rank of associate professor and must show promise of continuing accomplishments. Candidates for the rank of professor must demonstrate the achievement of excellence in either teaching (judged by COB standards) or research (as judged in the context of premier metropolitan research universities), and proficiency (meets benchmark standards of the COB) in the other; or above average performance in both teaching and research. Consideration must be given to the research criteria established in the department of the candidate and the College. Evidence of accomplishments as a teaching and research role model for junior faculty is expected. Cooperation with colleagues, respect for students, support of COB and school or department programs and activities, personal conduct and integrity will also affect a candidate's case for promotion. Emeritus Designation. A faculty member who has held academic rank in the COB may be given an emeritus appointment by the Board of Trustees upon the recommendation of the school, dean and the president of the university, in recognition of distinguished contributions to the college and the university. Early Promotion. Faculty requesting consideration for early promotion will be expected to have demonstrated accomplishments far in excess of the normal requirements for the academic rank for which they are applying. The granting of early promotion involves special consideration that should be given only in the case of an unusual amount of quality work done by the candidate. Successful candidates for early promotion to associate professor will be reviewed for tenure at the same time.

ARTICLE 2 Faculty Personnel Reviews The COB will conduct the following types of faculty personnel reviews: annual (Sec. 2.1); tenure/promotion (Sec 2.2); pre-tenure (Sec. 2.3) and periodic career (Sec. 2.4)

Section 2.1 Annual Reviews

A. Faculty Affected All term, probationary, and tenured faculty will be reviewed in writing annually. The evaluation will measure each faculty member's success in achieving work plan goals. In addition, part-time faculty members will be reviewed in writing by the appropriate officer responsible for their supervision. . (The appropriate officer is defined as the faculty member’s department chair or the director of the School of Accountancy for faculty members in accounting.)

77/121

9

B. Annual Review Process On or before the second Friday in January of each year, full-time faculty member will submit an annual report to the appropriate officer of the COB and to the Office of the Dean The appropriate officer, for good cause, may extend the deadline in writing. No annual report submitted after January 15 will be considered for a merit-based salary increase without the written consent of both the Dean and the appropriate officer. The appropriate officer shall prepare a one-page draft of the summary evaluations of each faculty member’s performance. For probationary and tenured faculty, this summary evaluation will evaluate teaching, research and service contributions from the previous year on a scale from 0 to 4 (as discussed in Appendix A) and emphasize opportunities for further improvement and development in the coming year(s). For term faculty, the summary evaluation will evaluate performance with respect to the assignments of the prevailing contract/work plan. The appropriate officer will submit a summary evaluation of each faculty member's performance to the Office of the Dean by the first Friday in February. For probationary and tenured faculty and term faculty, the Dean’s Office will prepare copies of all summary evaluations and annual reports prepared by faculty members for distribution to the members of the COB Performance Review Committee. The Performance Review Committee will meet prior to the fourth Friday in February to review all evaluations to ensure uniform treatment of all COB faculty members. The Performance Review Committee (PRC) shall reach consensus on all evaluations. Each faculty member will receive a copy of the summary evaluation in teaching, research and service as agreed to by the Performance Review Committee using the scale of 0 to 4 (as described in Appendix A). The appropriate officer will meet with each member of his or her faculty as soon as practicable after the completion of the work of the PRC to discuss with them performance of the past year and provide guidance for the coming year. B.1 Appeal of the Rating B.1.1 Appeal to the Performance Review Committee

If the faculty member disagrees with the rating of the PRC, he or she has one week after being informed of the rating to submit a written appeal to the Chair of the PRC. The appeal should include a statement of reasons as to why the faculty member believes a change is in order. The PRC will consider the appeal and make a recommendation to the Dean within four weeks of the receipt of the appeal. The PRC may invite the faculty member and/or the faculty member’s appropriate officer to meet with the committee to clarify any issues.

B.1.2 Final Decision The Dean will make a final decision by the second Friday in April on the rating after considering input from the faculty member, the PRC, and the appropriate officer who did the original evaluation.

78/121

10

B.2. Confidentiality As with any individual or committee that handles confidential material or information, it is required that such information will be held in the strictest of confidence.

C. Period covered by the annual report The annual report will cover the calendar year preceding the due date for all areas except research. Research for the three preceding calendar years will be included in the annual report. Annual reports will be submitted in a standardized format as provided by the Dean.

D. Annual Report Content It is the responsibility of the faculty member to include all pertinent information to be considered during the evaluation process. The report will include evidence of accomplishment in teaching, research, and service as specified in the work plans for the periods covered by the report

E. Rating System An individual rating will be given in teaching and service. The ratings will be: 4 Excellent – superior achievement relative to benchmark standards 3 Above average – exceeds benchmark standards 2 Meets benchmark standards (demonstrates proficiency) 1 Below average – acceptable, but below benchmark standards 0 Does not meet the performance standards of the COB The annual review rating in research can range from zero to four, depending on the classification of work based on the COB Journal lists and other acceptable intellectual contributions.

F. Performance Review Committee The department chair or director will be the discipline representative on the Performance Review Committee unless the department selects another discipline faculty member. That person will be a tenured faculty member who does not serve on the Personnel Committee. The election will take place during the first discipline faculty meeting of the academic year. The Associate Dean and the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs will be non-voting, but participating members of the committee. The chair of the committee will be elected by the voting members of the committee and may be any member of the committee.

Section 2.2 Tenure/Promotion Review

A. Probationary Period The timetable for tenure review is given in chapter four of the Redbook. Normally, faculty members will serve the full six-year probationary period for the granting of tenure. Experienced faculty from other universities may request credit toward tenure. The time credited toward tenure must be stipulated in the initial letter of appointment.

79/121

11

B. Year of the Review The tenure review shall normally occur in the year following the fifth year of faculty service at the university or as stipulated in the initial letter of appointment. A faculty member who is an assistant professor at the time of tenure consideration will also be concurrently considered for promotion to associate professor. Tenure consideration before the completion of the probationary period may occur in the rare case where the faculty member has demonstrated accomplishment at a level which is far superior to that expected for tenure. A faculty member may request only one early tenure evaluation.

C. Process for Tenure/Promotion Review C.1 Tenure: The tenure review begins in the Office of the Dean. By May 1 of the academic year prior to the review year, faculty members will be notified by letter that they will be reviewed for tenure during the next academic year. A copy of the letter will be sent to the department chair or school director and the chair of the COB Personnel Committee. C.2 Promotion: Promotion begins with a letter from the faculty member to the Dean. For consideration, the request must be received in the Dean's Office by May 1 for review during the fall semester. C.3 The Reports: Unless specified otherwise, all due dates refer to the Fall or Spring Undergraduate Semester Calendar in which the candidate is being considered for tenure/promotion. It will be referred to as the semester. The faculty member shall file an original and one copy of a report (with executive summary) with the chair of the COB Personnel Committee by August 23(January 23) one week prior to the beginning of the semester in which he/she will be reviewed. (Where feasible, the contents should be in electronic form). The report should include all available annual work plans and annual reviews for all years covered by the tenure or promotion review. Copies of the annual reviews may be obtained from the Dean’s office. The faculty member may include any other information he or she wishes to be considered. The completed review packet should be converted to electronic form for internal purposes. In addition the faculty member must provide separately to the chair of the COB Personnel Committee by June 1 (November 1) three (3) copies of the research materials to be included in the extramural review packet, and an electronic version of the same packet. C.4 Extramural Reviews: Three extramural reviewers for the candidate's files are to be selected. The appropriate administrator and faculty in the discipline(s) of the candidate will select potential extramural reviewers. The candidate has the opportunity to review the list of potential reviewers and reject a reviewer if the candidate reasonably expects the reviewer to be biased. All extramural reviewers must have research credentials of distinction and academic recognition in the field of the candidate. The reviewer must be tenured and hold faculty rank equal to or higher than the rank being sought by the faculty member under consideration. The chair of the COB Personnel Committee in consultation with the appropriate administrator is responsible for assuring that all of the reviewers are capable of providing a fair and unbiased evaluation. The candidate will determine the content of the extramural packets. However, the material in the packets should relate only to research. The chair of the COB Personnel Committee will be responsible for mailing the extramural review packets. Extramural reviewers will be selected by June 15

80/121

12

(November 15) and will be asked to respond by August 1 (January 1). A copy of the review with the identification of the reviewer deleted will be provided to the faculty member. The faculty member shall be provided with an opportunity to respond in writing to the evaluation. The extramural reviews and the faculty member’s response becomes part of the tenure/promotion report due to be filed one week prior to the beginning of the semester. C.5 School or department recommendation: Two copies of the documentation will be sent to the appropriate administrator. (Where feasible, any and all documentation should be in electronic form.) Tenured faculty members in the candidate’s discipline review the materials and, at a meeting called by the appropriate administrator, vote by secret ballot "recommended" or "not recommended." Members of the COB Personnel Committee do not participate in this part of the process. Ballots will provide an opportunity for evaluation in the specific areas of teaching, research, service, and adherence to professional standards and collaboration with students and colleagues. The ballot of the appropriate administrator must be signed. All other faculty members have the option of signing their ballots. The ballots will be submitted to the appropriate administrator in a sealed envelope. Candidates with joint appointments within the COB will be evaluated by the faculty in each of the respective disciplines and evaluated by the appropriate administrators for which the joint appointment applies. The appropriate administrator will summarize the discipline(s) vote and will also provide his or her own concise (one page) recommendation, including a clearly stated rationale for his or her decision. These two reports will be sent to the candidate by September 8 (January 21) the third Friday of the semester. The candidate must reply to the appropriate administrator no later than the fourth Friday of the semester September 15 (January 28) about any items of disagreement or clarification. The candidate may meet with the appropriate administrator to discuss the issues. The final recommendation by the appropriate administrator, the final discipline summary, all ballots, and any written replies by the candidate are due to the Personnel Committee no later than the fifth Tuesday of the semester September 22 (February 4). C.6 Personnel Committee Recommendation: From approximately September 22 (February 28) until October 15 (March 1) tThe COB Personnel Committee considers the documentation presented for each candidate under review. The COB Personnel Committee will "recommend" or "not recommend" in a concise (one page) summary report on approximately October 15 (March 1 no later than the eighth Friday of the semester). A copy of the report will be sent to the candidate and to the appropriate administrator. The candidate has one week after receiving the committee’s recommendation to report to the committee any items of disagreement or clarification. The candidate may meet with the committee to discuss the issues. The committee will consider the additional input provided by the faculty member and issue a final committee report and recommendation are due to the Dean with a copy to the appropriate administrator and the candidate no later than November 5 (March 20) the eleventh Friday of the semester eleventh Friday for undergraduate classes.

81/121

13

C.7 Dean’s Recommendation: The Dean will review a copy of the complete tenure/promotion file, the candidate’s personnel file, and the COB Personnel Committee report. The Dean will prepare a recommendation and will discuss the decision with the candidate prior to finalizing the report. Prior to December 1 (April 15), the Dean will send the recommendation to the candidate, with copies to the chair of the COB Personnel Committee and the appropriate administrator. The Dean will then forward the recommendation along with the entire file to the Graduate School and the Provost. C.8 Addition of new material: A faculty member may add newly available material evidence for reconsideration by the previous evaluators or rebuttals before the file is forwarded to the Provost. C.9 Access to the File: The candidate may examine any substantive material in the tenure/promotion file but shall not be informed of the identity of evaluators. C.10 Notification: If the recommendation of the Dean, the Personnel Committee or appropriate administrator is negative, the candidate must be notified by certified mail, unless the candidate officially withdraws their name from consideration. C.11 Appeals: Any appeals will be in accordance with the established University grievance procedures. A candidate who receives a negative recommendation on promotion or tenure from the appropriate administrator, the Dean of the COB, or the Provost may request a hearing before the University Faculty Grievance Committee. This request must be delivered on or before the tenth working day following the action challenged. C.12 Withdrawal from the process: If the candidate exercises the option of withdrawing from early tenure and/or promotion consideration, the process halts, and no recommendation is forwarded from the COB. A candidate may only withdraw from the regular tenure review process if he/she resigns from the university. C.13 Promotion of Administrators: In the case of a promotion review of a school director, department chair, or other COB administrator who would normally conduct such a review, the Dean shall appoint a full professor from the school or department to administer the review process.

Section 2.3 Pre-Tenure Reviews Each probationary faculty member shall be reviewed at the mid-point of his or her probationary period at the University.

A. Timing of the Pre-Tenure Review A.1 For faculty members who claim no prior service years, the pre-tenure review process shall take place during the sixth semester of their appointment. A.2 For faculty members with one year of prior service, the pre-tenure review process shall take place during the fifth semester of their appointment. A.3 For faculty members who claim two years of prior service, the pre-tenure review process shall take place during the fourth semester of their appointment

82/121

14

A.4 For faculty members who claim three years of prior service, the pre-tenure review process shall take place during the third semester of their appointment. A.5 For faculty members who claim four or five years of prior service, the pre-tenure review process shall be part of the hiring process. No faculty member who wishes to claim more than three years of prior service should be hired unless there is agreement among the discipline faculty, the chair or director, the COB Personnel Committee and the dean that the candidate has established a record that indicates a high probability for a successful tenure decision.

B. Process B.1 The process begins in the office of the dean. Prior to the end of the second week of the semester prior to the review, the faculty member will be notified by letter that they will be subject to a pre-tenure review. An electronic copy of the letter will be sent to the faculty member, the appropriate administrator and the chair of the COB Personnel Committee. B.2 The faculty member shall compile a file containing copies of his or her prior annual review(s) and work plans(s) (with an executive summary) and any other documentation he or she deems appropriate. One copy of the file is to be submitted to the chair of the COB Personnel Committee and one copy to the faculty member’s director, chair, or appropriate administrative officer. This file must be submitted no later than the first Friday of the review semester. B.3 Prior to the end of the sixth week of the review semester, the COB Personnel Committee and the discipline’s tenured faculty shall consider the documentation presented for each faculty member under consideration. No later the end of the seventh week, the COB Personnel Committee will prepare a summary report (not to exceed two pages). By the end of the seventh week, the appropriate administrator will also prepare a summary report specifying his/her own evaluation and summarizing the evaluations of the discipline’s tenured faculty. Both reports will indicate whether the faculty member is making adequate progress toward tenure. If the conclusion of either report is that the faculty member is not making adequate progress, the report(s) will include suggestions for improvement. A copy of both reports will be forwarded to the Dean. The appropriate administrator will receive a copy of the Personnel Committee report. Prior to the end of the eighth week of the semester, the Dean will issue a report to the faculty member containing all of the assessments (including the Dean’s) as to the faculty member’s progress toward tenure. B.4 A faculty member may add newly available material evidence to the file for consideration before the end of the sixth week of the review semester.

Section 2.4 Periodic Career Reviews All faculty members with tenure shall undergo periodic career reviews to evaluate their contribution to the mission of the college. The COB Personnel Committee shall conduct the review and issue an evaluation report. The evaluation report shall characterize the member's overall contribution as "satisfactory" (meeting the minimum requirements of the COB) or "unsatisfactory" (not meeting the minimum requirements of the COB). If the faculty member

83/121

15

under review holds a funded chair or professorship, the Personnel Committee will also make a recommendation to the Dean as to whether the faculty member should be reappointed to the chair or professorship.

A. Timing of the Periodic Career Review A.1 Faculty members with tenure will undergo a career review after every fifth year of service. A.2 Exceptions: A successful promotion review will serve as a career review, and the next review will not take place until five years after the promotion review. When the review period ends in a sabbatical (or other leave) year, the career review shall be deferred until the next academic year. A.3 All periodic career reviews for faculty members with tenure take place in the spring semester of the academic year.

B. Process B.1 By May 1 of the year prior to the review year, the faculty member will be notified by Office of the Dean that he or she will have a periodic review in the coming academic year. B.2 The Dean’s Office will provide to the Personnel Committee copies of the faculty member’s annual reviews and work plans for the period since the last review no later than the first Friday of the review semester. The faculty member may add any other documents he or she deems appropriate. B.3 The Personnel Committee examines the file and prior to the end of the eighth week of the semester issues a report to the faculty member. The faculty member has until the end of the ninth week of the semester to respond to the Personnel Committee. By the end of the tenth week of the semester, the Personnel Committee issues a (maximum 2 page) report to the Dean with copies to the faculty member and the appropriate college officer. B.4 If the conclusion of the report is that the faculty member's overall contribution has been “satisfactory" (met the minimum requirements of the COB) over the review period, the faculty member begins the next review period in the following academic year. B.5 If the conclusion of the report is that the faculty member's overall contribution has been "unsatisfactory" (did not meet the minimum requirements of the COB), the report shall state the deficiency (ies) that was (were) the basis for the conclusion. Within thirty calendar days of receipt of the report, the faculty member, in consultation with the appropriate college officer, shall prepare a career development plan, acceptable to the Dean, to remedy the deficiency (ies).

B.5.1 If the faculty member completes the agreed upon career development plan, the faculty member has one year to demonstrate satisfactory performance. B.5.2 The faculty member then undergoes another periodic review in the following academic year.

84/121

16

B.5.3 A faculty member whose performance is judged unsatisfactory in the second review is subject to appropriate disciplinary action, which may include proceedings for termination as described in Article 4.5 of the Redbook.

C. Term Faculty Faculty members with term appointments will be reviewed at the beginning of the last semester of their contract by the appropriate office and the Personnel Committee. The officer and the Personnel Committee both send a (maximum 1 page) report to the Dean stating the conclusions of the review. No term faculty member may be reappointed if the review is unsatisfactory.

Section 2.5 Grievance Procedures If a faculty member believes that a performance evaluation or tenure/promotion review is based upon improper consideration or otherwise results from a condition believed to be unjust or inequitable, he or she may submit a grievance in accordance with Article 4.4 of the Redbook.

Section 2.6 Personnel Committee The Personnel Committee shall consist of an odd number of tenured, non-administrative faculty members. The committee will elect a chair. There will be one member from each school or department that has 5 or more full-time, tenured or probationary faculty members. If the above scheme results in an even number, an at-large member will be elected by the COB faculty. Each school or department(s) and/or the entire faculty will elect as needed an alternate to replace any member who is being reviewed for promotion during that period. A member of the Personnel Committee undergoing periodic career review need not be replaced by an alternative. The faculty member under review will not participate in the discussion of his/her own periodic review. Committee members will serve for a period of three years, and terms will be staggered to assure continuity. Vacancies to unexpired terms will be filled as originally designed. Elections will take place by September 15. Committee members will be limited to three consecutive terms.

ARTICLE 3 Conditions of Faculty Employment

Section 3.1 Annual Work Plan By the end of January, the appropriate officer of each academic department will prepare and submit to the Dean’s Office annual work plans for each faculty member, consistent with Base-Line Work Plans, an administrative document external to the Personnel Document The standards for teaching, research, and service are given in Appendix A.

Section 3.2 Presence at the University

A. Minimum requirements The dean may require the unit faculty to report two weeks before classes begin in Fall and to continue in actual attendance until two weeks after the end of the final examination period in Spring except when an approved faculty work plan provides

85/121

17

otherwise. Although professional activities might require their absence on occasion, faculty members normally are expected to be available on campus to meet with their colleagues and their students.

B. Office Hours Faculty members must make themselves available to students by observing posted office hours and by allowing students to arrange appointments at other mutually convenient times.

C. Faculty Governance and Duties Participation in departmental meetings and college assemblies is assumed. Under normal circumstances, faculty members are also expected to serve on department, college, and university committees. Faculty are expected to respond to students and requests for information in a timely manner. Faculty are expected to participate in important College and University events, including graduation.

D. Meeting Classes Each faculty member is responsible for the conduct of assigned courses and is required to meet such classes and make such assignments as will fulfill the learning objectives of the course.

Section 3.3 Work Outside the University Work outside the University is covered under Redbook Section 4.3.3. Paid or unpaid work outside the university may not interfere with commitments made on the annual work plan. Faculty members are required to include in the annual report an accounting of all professional work done outside the university.

86/121

18

APPENDIX A Annual Review Guidelines

Section A-1 Teaching Student learning is the primary reason universities exist. Our teaching must both educate and entice future scholars. Those who teach, above all, must be well informed and steeped in the knowledge of their fields. Hard work and serious study underpin good teaching. A faculty member must help students acquire the skills and knowledge necessary for a successful professional career or for advancement to the next stage in their formal education. An outstanding faculty stimulates active, not passive, learning and encourages students to be critical, creative thinkers, with an appreciation that learning is a lifelong endeavor.

A-1.1 Determination of Teaching Loads A faculty member’s teaching assignments will be determined as part of the development of the annual work plan. See Section 3.1.

A-1.2 Minimum Standards At a minimum, faculty are expected to meet classes on time and as scheduled, maintain up-to-date course content, develop syllabi that are consistent with the course learning objectives, have well-articulated assessment mechanisms, allow students reasonable time and opportunity to complete the course evaluation, hold office hours commensurate with the teaching schedule, and maintain a professional relationship with students. While a faculty member is free to craft his or her own approach to teaching a particular course, the course learning objectives are the responsibility of the program faculty. Faculty members may not omit any learning objectives unless the program faculty agrees. The term "program faculty" refers to the faculty who teach in a designated program, such as the undergraduate accountancy program and the MBA programs. In the case of the undergraduate business core and the MBA program core, the faculty must agree to the learning objectives that are part of the core curriculum. The involved program faculty consists of the faculty of the undergraduate programs and masters programs that use the business core as the foundation for their programs. Faculty members may not omit any course learning objective unless the involved program faculty agrees.

A-1.3 Assessment Factors to be used in evaluating teaching performance shall include any evidence deemed relevant by the faculty member and the appropriate officer that provides support specific to his or her teaching proficiency. However, as a minimum, the supporting evidence should include student evaluations, evidence of meeting course learning objectives, and evidence of remaining current in one's teaching field. Judgments about teaching will be based on all evidence presented for the period of review.

A-1.4 Criteria for the teaching factors include: Syllabi prepared in such a manner that the student, by reading the syllabi, will be properly informed regarding the topics covered in the course, the relevance of the topics in terms of learning objectives, and the expectations of the faculty member or members teaching the course.

Consistency between the graded components and the learning objectives.

87/121

19

Acceptable student evaluations. Evidence of course and/or teaching improvement, if appropriate. Justifiable grade distributions Evidence of the faculty member’s currency in his or her teaching field.

When evaluating a faculty member’s teaching accomplishments, consideration should be given to such factors as the number of course preparations during the year, the size of the faculty member’s classes, and new approaches being tried by a faculty member in a course. ** As agreed upon by the COB faculty on October 19, 2007, the criteria for the evaluation of teaching appear in Appendix B.

A-1.5 Annual Review Ratings: 4 Excellent – superior achievement relative to benchmark standards of the COB Considering the teaching assessment factors as a whole, the faculty member’s performance is deemed to be well in excess of the COB’s acceptable performance standards. 3 Above average – exceeds the benchmark standards of the COB Considering the teaching assessment factors as a whole, the faculty member’s performance is deemed to exceed the COB’s acceptable performance standards. 2 Meets benchmark standards of the COB Considering the teaching assessment factors as a whole, the faculty member’s performance is deemed to meet the high quality performance standards expected of a COB faculty member. 1 Below average – acceptable but below COB benchmark standards Considering the teaching assessment factors as a whole, while the faculty member’s performance is generally acceptable, substantial deficiencies are noted in one or more of the factors for evaluating teaching. 0 Does not meet the performance standards of the COB Considering the teaching assessment factors as a whole, the faculty member’s performance is deemed unacceptable. This rating indicates ongoing deficiencies in several of the factors or extreme deficiencies in one or more of the factors.

Section A-2 Research and scholarly activity Through our research we will develop, communicate, and apply innovative ideas that influence theory and practice. We engage in research activities to discover and disseminate knowledge and improve our curricula.

A-2.1 Determination of research expectations A faculty member’s research expectations will be determined as part of the development of the annual work plan.

88/121

20

A-2.2 Minimum Standards Each faculty member with a research responsibility is expected to engage in scholarly activity leading to the output of published works. (See the table below.) For purposes of the annual review process, the COB will use the following reporting horizon: 3 years for articles appearing in leading discipline or field journals (the elite journal list); 2 years for articles appearing in other significant, refereed discipline or field journals (the high quality journal list), 1 year for all other demonstration works. It is expected that each faculty member with a research responsibility will exhibit a process that regularly moves from work-in-progress (development work) to published work (demonstration work). Faculty members who publish in management journals outside of their primary departmental and discipline affiliation will be evaluated as if they had published in journals in their primary field, e.g., a finance professor publishing in the American Economic Review.

A-2.3 Assessment Table of Acceptable Work in the Two Research Phases

Phase Acceptable Works Work-in-progress Working papers (development) Conference presentations Conference proceedings Work submitted for publication Articles in a revise and resubmit status Presentations at faculty research seminars Scholarly books in progress Scholarly book chapters in progress Submission of grant proposals

Award of grant proposals Creative projects or designs Grant reports

Technical reports from applied research Published works (Demonstration) Articles accepted for publication in refereed

journals (academic, professional, and pedagogical) Monographs Scholarly books and textbooks Chapters in scholarly books and textbooks Peer refereed research arising from funded (grant)

research Publication in trade journals related to one’s

discipline or research expertise Published academic book reviews in refereed

journals Professional books related to one’s discipline or

research expertise

89/121

21

A faculty member may make a case for including materials other than those listed above as research and scholarly activity. The administrator who reviews the faculty member’s annual work plan will judge which area is appropriate for such materials. Disagreements between the appropriate officer and the faculty member will be presented to the PRC for resolution. COB faculty will be made aware of the acceptable deviations to the above.

A-2.4 Criteria for Research The COB faculty agrees to a list of Elite and High Quality journals. At least every three years, the list will be reviewed and evaluated by the Research Committee and presented to the COB faculty for approval. This list will serve as the approved list annually for research outlets. Faculty members who publish in a journal or other appropriate outlet as defined in Section A-2.3 that is not on either of the Elite or High Quality journal lists will have their publications counted in the one-year category. Prior to the submission of a paper to a journal outside the six business discipline areas, faculty members may make a case to their departments that the non-business journal be considered as equivalent to the journals in the Elite or High Quality Journal lists. A positive department recommendation would be forwarded to the Research Committee for its approval or denial. Faculty making a case for equivalency should cite evidence such as citation indexes, journal rankings, impact factors, the quality of the editorial review board, and/or the quality of the authors publishing in the journal. The list will be maintained by the Office of the Dean and will be published on the COB intranet. Publications in journals in the Elite list are worth 4 points toward a faculty member's annual research evaluation in the year of acceptance and 4 points in each of the next two years. Publications in journals in the high quality list are worth 2 points toward a faculty member's annual research evaluation in the year of acceptance and 2 points the following year. Other publications in the one year category (with the exception of prestigious scholarly books published by various top quality academic presses - which will be evaluated by the PRC on a case by case basis) receive 1 point each, with a maximum of 2 points in any year. Paper presentations at professional meetings are worth ½ point, as are proceedings, but the maximum points one can accumulate as a result of paper presentations and/or proceedings is ½ point in any year. The maximum of two points in the one year publication category is inclusive of the ½ point for presentations and/or proceedings. If a faculty member's research point total exceeds 4 points in any year, that faculty member will be considered as a candidate for an additional adjustment increment out of the 20 percent of the raise pool that is administered outside of the Personnel Document formula. Other faculty members are also eligible for these adjustment increments based on their record of performance.

A-2.5 Annual Review Ratings The annual review of research covers the current and the two prior calendar years. The annual review rating can range from zero to four, depending on the classification of work based on the COB Journal lists and other acceptable intellectual contributions.

90/121

22

Section A-3 Service Service is considered contributing talent to the department, the college, the university, students, the profession, and the economic development needs of the broader community. Service within the university community need not be specifically related to the faculty member’s expertise. Service outside the university community should relate to the faculty member’s expertise.

A-3.1 Determination of Service Expectations A faculty member’s service expectations will be determined as part of the development of the annual work plan. Normally, probationary faculty members will have a reduced service expectation.

A-3.2 Minimum Standards Each faculty member who has a service component must engage in active service that produces meaningful output for the college or university. Service activities shall support the college and department outcomes.

A-3.3 Assessment Service activities outside of the university should relate directly to one's field of knowledge and flow directly out of this professional activity. Assessment of service is difficult. It requires a great deal of judgment on the part of the evaluator. The faculty member is responsible for presenting evidence of his or her service accomplishments in a way that will best allow the administrator to make sound and reasonable judgment as to the quality of the service. This should include documentation from those who received the service, where available. Civic projects related to community economic development may also be counted among a faculty member’s service contributions.

A-3.4 Criteria

A-3.4.1 Internal Service Quality of work produced Benefit to the university, COB, school or department. Benefit to the students served

A-3.4.1 External Service Benefit to the recipient of the service. Relationship of the activity to the professor's academic expertise Benefit to the university, college, school or department. Impact on the reputation of the College and the University Benefit to economic and social development in the Louisville, Kentucky, or the broader national and international community

91/121

23

A-3.5 Faculty Duties and Governance: Participation in COB governance and other normal duties is part of the responsibility of all faculty members who are not on leave or sabbatical. They include participation in department and College faculty meetings, recruiting faculty, responding in a timely manner to correspondence and requests by the chair and others in the college, and active participation in discipline promotion and tenure decisions. Faculty members are expected to participate in these activities without regard to the other parts of the annual plan. Attention to these duties is no less an expectation than holding classes at the scheduled time. If the faculty member is evaluated as not fulfilling responsibilities in faculty duties and governance, the faculty member will receive a rating of “Does not meet the performance standards of the COB” in Service. In addition, faculty members who substitute other responsibilities for service are not excused from their responsibilities for these duties and governance.

A-3.6 Annual Review Ratings Expectations will be adjusted based on the percentage of service responsibility established in the work plan.

4 Excellent - superior achievement relative to the benchmark standards of the COB The faculty member’s performance is deemed to be well in excess of the COB’s acceptable performance standards. 3 Above average - exceeds the benchmark standards of the COB The faculty member’s performance is deemed to exceed the COB’s acceptable performance standards. 2 Meets the benchmark standards of the COB The faculty member’s performance is deemed to meet the high quality performance standards expected of a COB faculty member. 1 Below average – acceptable but below COB benchmark standards While the faculty member’s performance is generally acceptable, substantial deficiencies are noted in meeting service responsibilities. 0 Does not meet the performance standards of the COB The faculty member’s performance is deemed unacceptable. This rating indicates ongoing deficiencies in service.

Section A-4 Adherence to Professional Standards Faculty members are expected to adhere to applicable standards related to their profession. The annual evaluation of adherence to professional standards will be reflected in the teaching, research, and service rating categories, as applicable.

92/121

24

Section A-5 Collaboration with Colleagues and Students Cooperation and respect for faculty, staff, and students are expected of all members of the College of Business community. The university is an institution that cherishes vigorous academic debate and respects diverse viewpoints. The annual evaluation of collaboration with colleagues and students will be reflected in the teaching, research, and service rating categories, as applicable.

Section A-6 Overall Evaluation The rating in the Overall category shall be a composite score based on the faculty member’s ratings in each of the Teaching, Research, and Service categories and their related work plan percentages. The percentages assigned to each of the rating categories will be multiplied times the appropriate evaluation multiple number (see section A-7, below) to calculate a weighted average score.

Section A-7 Merit-based Salary Increase (MBSI) Annual salary increases for the faculty of the COB will be based on the overall composite score. The composite score shall be determined using the weightings from a faculty member’s work plan and the score for each category as assessed by the Performance Review Committee.

Evaluation Multiples Excellent 4 Above average 3 Meets benchmark standards of the COB 2 Below average 1 Does not meet the performance standards of the COB 0

The merit pool shall be divided between absolute amounts and percentages based on a 50-50 split. In any year(s) for which there is no merit pay increase, the composite score of that (those) year(s) shall be averaged with the composite score in the subsequent year in which there is a merit pool to calculate an average composite score for the subsequent year. Unless otherwise directed by the university, each year approximately 80% of the total faculty salary raise pool will be awarded using the merit process outlined above. Approximately 20% of the faculty salary raise pool will be reserved for merit-based discretionary pool that will be awarded using a consensual process among department chairs and the Dean. Maintenance of teaching credentials - 20 % - Maintains a qualified faculty status as a Scholarly Academic (SA), a Practice Academic (PA), a Scholarly Practitioner (SP), or an Instructional Practitioner (IP) as defined by the COB under the AACSB standards. If not in a qualified status is making progress toward regaining these credentials.

93/121

25

APPENDIX B Criteria for Evaluating Teaching Preparation - 30% -- Evaluated by the Department chair, includes innovation, course currency from an evaluation of the syllabus, use of rubrics and assessment in support of our assessment initiative and to improve course presentations over time; consideration of the number of preparations. Student feedback - 20% - Based on data from the last two questions on the teaching evaluation form. Supplemental teaching duties - 30% - Evaluated as a totality by the department chair, including such dimensions as schedules and holds reasonable office hours; helps with curriculum planning; advising and mentoring students; assists with career management; keeps Digital Measures data up to date. Maintenance of teaching credentials - 20 % - Maintains Academically Qualified (AQ) or Professionally Qualified (PQ) credentials as defined by the COB for AACSB; If not in compliance with AQ and/or PQ standards is making progress toward regaining these credentials. Maintenance of teaching credentials - 20 % - Maintains Faculty Qualifications as defined by the COB, consistent with AACSB guidelines. If not in compliance with standards, is making progress toward regaining these credentials. Maintenance of teaching credentials – 20% - Maintains faculty qualifications as defined within the accreditation standards for business accreditation of the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business.

94/121

ANNUAL MEETING OF THE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

10:00 a.m., September 22, 2016

Jefferson Room, Grawemeyer Hall

In Open Session Tab

I. Call to Order Benz

Welcome New Board Member: Prof. Enid Trucios-Haynes

Speed School/FirstBuild Presentation

II. Report of the Nominating Committee Prather

Action Item: Election of Officers for 2016-2017 1*

III. Consent Agenda Chair

Approval of Minutes

Board of Trustees Special Meeting, 9-9-2016 2

From the Academic and Student Affairs Committee, 9-22-2016

Approval of Creation of Bachelor of Arts in Sustainability 3

Approval of Creation of Center for Instructional and

Behavioral Research in Schools (CIBRS) 4

From the Finance Committee, 9-22-2016

Approval of Banking Signature Authority 5

From the Personnel Committee, 9-22-2016

Approval of Revisions to Personnel Documents

School of Medicine 6

College of Business 7

Routine Personnel Matters/Recommendations re: Promotion and Tenure 8

IV. Report of the President Pinto

Safety Update W. Hall

Resolution of Appreciation for Dr. Pamela Feldhoff, Victoria Allen,

and Angela Lewis-Klein Pinto 9

V. Routine Action Items: Chair

Resolution for ACC 10

Signature Authority 11

VI. Action Item: Litigation Settlement Authority Chair 12

VII. Action Item: Approval of Authorization to Executive Committee Chair 13

VIII. Information Items: Report from the

UofL Foundation – Semi Annual Report Moore

Alumni Association – Annual Report Abrams/Benson

ULAA – Annual Report Hall/Prather

Overseers Update Benson/Hughes

IX. Report of the Chair Chair

X. Executive Session Chair

Motion to recess to discuss proposed and pending litigation

pursuant to KRS 61.810(1)(c)

XI. Open Meeting Reconvenes Chair

Report on Executive Session

Appropriate action, if any

XII. Adjournment Chair

96/121

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE


September 9, 2016

In Open Session

Members of the University of Louisville Board of Trustees met at 10:00 a.m. on September 9,

2016, in the Jefferson Room, Grawemeyer Hall, Belknap Campus, with members present and

absent as follows:

Present: Dr. Larry Benz, Chairman


Mrs. Marie Abrams


Dr. Emily Bingham

Mr. Ron Butt

Mr. Stephen Campbell (via videoconference)

Mr. Craig Greenberg

Mr. Doug Hall

Mr. Larry Hayes

Mr. Bruce Henderson


Ms. Brucie Moore

Dr. Jody Prather


Prof. Enid Trucios-Haynes

Mr. Aaron Vance

Absent: Mr. Jonathan Blue

From the













98/121

Outside


Mr. Sam Hinkle, Stoll Keenon Ogden

I. Call to Order

Having determined a quorum present, Chairman Benz called the meeting to order at

10:00 a.m.

Approval of Minutes, August 25, 2016

Mr. Butt made a motion, which Mr. Hall seconded, to approve the minutes of the August

25, 2016 meeting. The motion passed.

II. Executive Session

Mr. Hall made a motion, which Mr. Henderson seconded, to go into Executive Session at

10:01 a.m. to discuss proposed and pending litigation, pursuant to KRS 61.810(1)(c).

The motion passed.

III. Open Meeting Reconvenes

The open meeting reconvened at 11:35 a.m. Chairman Benz reported the board discussed

proposed and pending litigation.

Mr. Butt stated he will tender to Governor Bevin his resignation as a Trustee, effective

today at the close of business.

Mr. Vance made a motion, which Dr. Prather seconded, to approve the following

resolution:

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES


Pursuant to notice given on September 8, 2016 to the trustees, the Board of

Trustees (the “Board”) of the University of Louisville (“University”) met on

September 9, 2016, for the purpose of considering action to address issues

related to the University of Louisville Foundation, Inc.

The Board of the University, acting as of the 9th day of September, 2016,

approves the following recitals and resolutions:

99/121

WHEREAS, the purpose of the University of Louisville Foundation, Inc. and

all of its related entities (the "Foundation") is to hold and maintain assets for

the benefit of the University; and

WHEREAS, by statute, the University of Louisville Foundation, Inc. is a

fiduciary of the University; and

WHEREAS, significant questions have arisen with respect to the use of funds

held for the benefit of the University by the Foundation; and

WHEREAS, the Foundation has not been forthcoming with respect to

requested information concerning the use and application of funds held by

the Foundation for the benefit of the University; and

WHEREAS, the Foundation is subject to the Open Records Act of the

Commonwealth Kentucky; and


several Open Records Act requests made upon it for information; and

WHEREAS, the Chair of the Board and the Chair of the Foundation have

engaged in direct and candid discussions regarding the issues related to the

Foundation, but have been unsuccessful in arriving at a mutually acceptable

resolution; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to KRS 164.830, the Board constitutes a body

corporate whose powers include the administration, on behalf of the

University, subject to the conditions attached, of all revenues accruing from

endowments, appropriations, allotments, grants or bequests, and all types of

property; and

WHEREAS, legal action in the name, and on behalf of, the University against

the Foundation is necessary.

RESOLVED, that the University will initiate legal action against the

Foundation for relief including, without limitation, an accounting, the

inspection of books and records of the Foundation, and the production of

records pursuant to the Open Records Act of the Commonwealth of

Kentucky and redress for breaches of fiduciary duty, including without

limitation, temporary and permanent injunctive relief; and

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Chair of the Board is authorized and

directed, as he should see fit, to coordinate with outside legal counsel with

respect to the preparation of the complaint and pleadings necessary for the

initiation of said legal action; and

100/121

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Chairman of the Board, in his discretion,

is authorized to execute and deliver such pleadings and necessary documents

and instruments as are necessary or appropriate to initiate said legal action

against the Foundation and, in his discretion, initiate the legal action; and

RESOLVED FURTHER, notwithstanding this authorization of legal action

by the University against the Foundation, the Chair of the Board is and

remains empowered and authorized to pursue all means of resolution of the

dispute between the University and the Foundation;

RESOLVED FURTHER, that any third-party may rely upon these

Resolutions unless and until they have actual notice of their amendment or

repeal.

Ms. Moore proposed amending the resolution to state, “Whereas, legal action in the

name, and on behalf of, the University against the Foundation may be necessary.

Resolved, that the University may initiate legal action against the Foundation for relief

including, without limitation, an accounting, the inspection of books and records of the

Foundation, and the production of records pursuant to the Open Records Act of the

Commonwealth of Kentucky and redress for breaches of fiduciary duty, including

without limitation, temporary and permanent injunctive relief;”

Ms. Moore made a motion, which Prof. Trucios-Haynes seconded, to approve the

following amended resolution:



Pursuant to notice given on September 8, 2016 to the trustees, the Board of

Trustees (the “Board”) of the University of Louisville (“University”) met on

September 9, 2016, for the purpose of considering action to address issues

related to the University of Louisville Foundation, Inc.

The Board of the University, acting as of the 9th day of September, 2016,

approves the following recitals and resolutions:

WHEREAS, the purpose of the University of Louisville Foundation, Inc. and

all of its related entities (the "Foundation") is to hold and maintain assets for

the benefit of the University; and

WHEREAS, by statute, the University of Louisville Foundation, Inc. is a

fiduciary of the University; and

WHEREAS, significant questions have arisen with respect to the use of funds

held for the benefit of the University by the Foundation; and

101/121


requested information concerning the use and application of funds held by

the Foundation for the benefit of the University; and

WHEREAS, the Foundation is subject to the Open Records Act of the

Commonwealth Kentucky; and


several Open Records Act requests made upon it for information; and

WHEREAS, the Chair of the Board and the Chair of the Foundation have

engaged in direct and candid discussions regarding the issues related to the

Foundation, but have been unsuccessful in arriving at a mutually acceptable

resolution; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to KRS 164.830, the Board constitutes a body

corporate whose powers include the administration, on behalf of the

University, subject to the conditions attached, of all revenues accruing from

endowments, appropriations, allotments, grants or bequests, and all types of

property; and

WHEREAS, legal action in the name, and on behalf of, the University against

the Foundation may be necessary.

RESOLVED, that the University may initiate legal action against the

Foundation for relief including, without limitation, an accounting, the

inspection of books and records of the Foundation, and the production of

records pursuant to the Open Records Act of the Commonwealth of

Kentucky and redress for breaches of fiduciary duty, including without

limitation, temporary and permanent injunctive relief; and

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Chair of the Board is authorized and

directed, as he should see fit, to coordinate with outside legal counsel with

respect to the preparation of the complaint and pleadings necessary for the

initiation of said legal action; and

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Chairman of the Board, in his discretion,

is authorized to execute and deliver such pleadings and necessary documents

and instruments as are necessary or appropriate to initiate said legal action

against the Foundation and, in his discretion, initiate the legal action; and

RESOLVED FURTHER, notwithstanding this authorization of legal action

by the University against the Foundation, the Chair of the Board is and

remains empowered and authorized to pursue all means of resolution of the

dispute between the University and the Foundation;

102/121

RESOLVED FURTHER, that any third-party may rely upon these

Resolutions unless and until they have actual notice of their amendment or

repeal.

The motion passed with Mr. Butt opposed, and Dr. Hughes abstaining.

IV. Adjournment

Mr. Benson made a motion, which Mr. Hayes seconded, to adjourn.

The meeting adjourned at 11:38 a.m.

Approved by:

___________________________________

Secretary

103/121

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE


September 9, 2016

In Executive Session

Present: Dr. Larry Benz, Chairman


Mrs. Marie Abrams


Dr. Emily Bingham

Mr. Ron Butt

Mr. Stephen Campbell (via videoconference)

Mr. Craig Greenberg

Mr. Doug Hall

Mr. Larry Hayes

Mr. Bruce Henderson


Ms. Brucie Moore

Dr. Jody Prather


Prof. Enid Trucios-Haynes

Mr. Aaron Vance

Absent: Mr. Jonathan Blue

From the








Outside


Mr. Sam Hinkle, Stoll Keenon Ogden

I. Call to Order

Chairman Benz called the meeting to order.

104/121

I. Proposed and Pending Litigation

Proposed and pending litigation was discussed.

II. Adjournment

The executive session was adjourned at 11:35 a.m.

Approved by:

____________________________

Secretary

105/121


CONCERNING THE CREATION OF THE

BACHELOR OF ARTS IN SUSTAINABILITY



RECOMMENDATION:


Bachelor of Arts in Sustainability beginning in Fall 2017.

BACKGROUND:

The Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences supports the creation of the Bachelor of Arts in

Sustainability. The degree will be housed in the Department of Urban and Public Affairs (UPA), which

currently coordinates a Master of Interdisciplinary Studies: Concentration in Sustainability, Master of

Urban Planning (MUP), Master of Public Administration (MPA) and a Ph.D. in Urban and Public

Affairs. Both the MPA and MUP degrees are nationally accredited and ranked. At this time, UPA is

the only department in the College of Arts and Sciences that does not offer an undergraduate degree.

The undergraduate Bachelor of Arts in Sustainability program will train students to research,

identify, implement and monitor sustainable processes, and systems. The degree program is designed

to educate, train and prepare students for future careers in sustainability-related endeavors, including

the environment, energy, climate change, public policy, transportation, urban and regional planning,

and also serve as a well-rounded base to allow students to pursue graduate training in affiliated fields

of study.

The degree is designed as an interdisciplinary program and will require a minimum of 124

hours to complete. The degree will leverage current and proposed resources at the university, allowing

students to obtain education and training in sustainability concepts, while also taking advantage of

courses that address sustainable issues within different disciplines. The degree program proposal has

been based on models from other university programs, several years of discussion at the university

among interested departments, and through the Sustainability Council that was appointed by the

Provost in 2008.

The Faculty Senate recommended the creation of the Bachelor of Arts degree in Sustainability at

their meeting on May 4, 2016. The Council on Postsecondary Education 45-day review of the pre-

proposal was completed on July 22, 2016. The Acting Executive Vice President/University Provost joins

the Acting President in making this recommendation.


Passed ________________ Passed _______________


Other __________________ Other ________________

__________________________ ______________________

Secretary Secretary

106/121


CONCERNING THE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE

CENTER FOR INSTRUCTIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH IN SCHOOLS

(CIBRS)



RECOMMENDATION:


University of Louisville (UofL) Center for Instructional and Behavioral Research in Schools

(CIBRS).

BACKGROUND:

Dr. Ann Larson, Dean of the College of Education and Human Development (CEHD)

proposes the creation of the University of Louisville (UofL) Center for Instructional and

Behavioral Research in Schools (CIBRS). Dr. Terry Scott, Professor and Distinguished

University Scholar will serve as the director of the center. The purpose of this Center is to

promote and fund research and community outreach related to the prevention of student failures

(academic, social, health, mental health) in educational settings. It is anticipated that this focus

area encompasses departments across the College of Education and Human Development

(CEHD) as well as units across the university (e.g., Social Work, Psychology, and Public

Health).

Instructional and behavioral research involves the application of scientific methods to

understand and prevent student failure and dysfunction. The proposed Center would create

collaborations among a wide-range of interested parties across the university to focus specifically

on prevention efforts as they relate to education, broadly defined as public schooling from pre-

school through post-secondary education. Current work in this area has been successful but is

limited to isolated departments across the university. Over the past eight years, there have been

five separate grant projects that have been funded through Dr. Scott in the Department of Special

Education, providing a focus on preventing learning and behavioral disorders in schools. Three

of these projects are still in existence and currently bringing in $1.5 million per year to continue

for at least the next two years. One of these, the Academic and Behavior Response to

Intervention (ABRI) project, has been consistently funded on an annual renewal basis for the

past seven years. There is indication from the funding agent that this project is expected to

continue and likely expand well into the future. This project accounts for approximately

$750,000 per year and partially supports multiple faculty and staff positions.

ABRI evaluation activities have allowed for the support of over 7000 teacher-student

classroom observations - currently the largest such dataset in the world. Analyses from this work

have been well-received and there is demand around the world for services in this area

(information provided to New Zealand, Australia, Sweden, Norway, and Netherlands). Further,

107/121

ABRI has produced instructional video modules for Kentucky Education Television which now

owns the rights and is selling them as part of their own training program.

In addition to the ABRI project, the State Personnel Development Grant (SPDG) is

funded at approximately $600,000 per year. The SPDG involves training school personnel from

across the state in effective instructional strategies for students who are at-risk of failure in

reading and mathematics. In addition, this project involves assessment of both intervention

fidelity and outcomes through a comprehensive evaluation plan. Affiliated faculty and staff

conduct research as part of these evaluation efforts with both the ABRI and SPDG projects.

The centralized structure of a center will serve as a hub for the type of increased

collaboration that is necessary to significantly expand funding and visibility across the U.S. and

internationally. The Faculty Senate voted to recommend the creation of the center on June 1,

2016. The Acting Executive Vice President/University Provost joins the President in making this

recommendation.


Passed ________________ Passed _______________


Other __________________ Other ________________

__________________________ ______________________

Secretary Secretary

108/121



CONCERNING BANKING RESOLUTIONS

Finance Committee – September 22, 2016


RECOMMENDATION:

The Acting President recommends:

That the University of Louisville Board of Trustees adopts the attached resolution

relating to investment custodial and safekeeping accounts at PNC Capital

Markets, LLC Pittsburg, Pennsylvania.


Passed ________________ Passed _______________


Other __________________ Other ________________

__________________________ ______________________

Secretary Secretary

109/121

RESOLUTION

RESOLVED THAT:

(1) PNC (“Bank”) is designated a depository of funds of the University of Louisville

(“University”).

(2) This resolution applies to all accounts opened by the University’s Controller’s Office at

the Bank under University of Louisville name.

(3) The following officers of the University, listed below, and future incumbents in these

positions, are authorized to open and/or close Accounts, delegate and delete check

signers, sign checks on, or withdraw funds from, the Accounts and the Bank is authorized

to pay and charge the Accounts for checks or withdrawal requests:

Neville G. Pinto

___________________________

Acting President

Dale B. Billingsley

___________________________

Acting Executive Vice President

and University Provost

Harlan M. Sands

___________________________

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial

& Operating Officer

John R. Shipley

___________________________

Interim Associate Vice-President

for Finance/Controller

(4) The following employees of the University of Louisville, listed below, are authorized to

obtain Treasury Management Services, sign checks on or withdraw funds from the

Accounts as agents of the University and the Bank is authorized to pay and charge the

Accounts for checks or withdrawal requests subject to the conditions of paragraph (5) of

this Resolution:

Beverly Santamouris

___________________________

Director of Accounting and

Financial Reporting

110/121

David M. Woods

___________________________

Assistant Treasurer

(5) The following limitations shall apply to the signature authority of the above named

University of Louisville officers and employees: (a) for amounts less than $100,000 – one

signature which may be mechanical; (b) for amounts equal to, or greater than, $100,000 –

two signatures, one of which may be mechanical.

(6) The officers and employees named above have provided specimen signature herein and

are authorized to sign signature cards and Accounts agreements.

(7) The Assistant Secretary of the University Board of Trustees is authorized and directed to

deliver for and on behalf of the University, a certificate of this resolution to the bank.

(8) The Bank is authorized to rely upon this Resolution until the bank has received written

notice of any amendment or recession of the resolution.

Certificate

I certify that I am the duly qualified Secretary of the Board of Trustees of the University

of Louisville, that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted at the regular

meeting of such Board which was duly held on the 22nd day of September 2016, at

which meeting a quorum was present, and a majority of members present voted in favor

of the adoption of such resolution. I further certify that such resolution is still in full

force and effect.

Dated this 22nd day of September 2016.

______________________________________ Secretary

Board of Trustees

(Seal of the University)

111/121


CONCERNING THE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

PERSONNEL POLICY



RECOMMENDATION:

The Acting President recommends that the Board of Trustees approves the revised School

of Medicine Policy for Promotion, Appointment and Tenure and for Periodic Career Review in

the form attached to be effective immediately.

(Revisions on Pages 5, 19, 22, 24 of 31)

BACKGROUND:

These revisions were approved by the School of Medicine Faculty and the Faculty




Passed: ___________ Passed: ___________


Other: ____________ Other: ____________

_____________________________ __________________________________

Secretary Secretary

112/121


CONCERNING THE COLLEGE OF BUSINESS

PERSONNEL DOCUMENT



RECOMMENDATION:

The Acting President recommends that the Board of Trustees approve the revised College

of Business Personnel Document in the form attached to be effective immediately.

(Revisions on pages 1, 11, 12, and 25 of 25)

BACKGROUND:

These revisions were approved by the College of Business Faculty and the Faculty




Passed: ___________ Passed: ___________


Other: ____________ Other: ____________

_____________________________ __________________________________

Secretary Secretary

113/121

Ms. Victoria Allen

Dr. Pamela Feldhoff


WHEREAS, Victoria Allen, Pamela Feldhoff, and Angela Lewis-Klein served the

University of Louisville faithfully, energetically, and effectively as members of the Board of

Trustees;

WHEREAS, in their capacities as a member of the Board, they distinguished themselves

as hard-working and cooperative participants in a wide range of board activities, winning the

respect and affection of their fellow trustees, as well as their respective constituency groups;

WHEREAS, each served as engaging members, Chairs, and Vice Chairs of the Board’s

standing and ad hoc committees;

WHEREAS, they served diligently and capably as a member of the Board of Directors of

the University of Louisville Research Foundation, Inc.;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the University

hereby expresses its sincere admiration and deep appreciation to Ms. Victoria Allen, Dr. Pamela

Feldhoff, and Ms. Angela Lewis-Klein for their untiring commitment as a members of the Board;

and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that individualized copies of this Resolution,

appropriately signed, be presented to Ms. Allen, Dr. Feldhoff, and Ms. Lewis-Klein.

_________________________ ____________________________

President Chairman, Board of Trustees

University of Louisville University of Louisville

115/121

Atlantic Coast Conference

Governing Board Certification Form Academic Year 2016-17

As Chairman of the Governing Board at University of Louisville, I

attest that:

1) Responsibility for the administration of the athletics

program has been delegated to the Chief Executive

Officer of the Institution.

2) The Chief Executive Officer has the mandate and support

of the board to operate a program of integrity in full

compliance with NCAA, Conference and all other

relevant rules and regulations.

3) The Chief Executive Officer, in consultation with the

Faculty Athletics Representative and the Athletics

Director, determines how the institutional vote shall be

cast on issues of athletics policy presented to the NCAA

and the Conference.

Date Presented to the Governing Board: ________________________

Signed: __________________________________________________ (Chairman of the Governing Board)

Signed: __________________________________________________ (CEO of Member Institution)

Please return completed form before October 21, 2016 to:

Commissioner John D. Swofford

Atlantic Coast Conference

4512 Weybridge Lane

Greensboro, NC 27407

116/121


UPDATED RESOLUTION ON SIGNATURE AUTHORITY

FOR UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE

September 22, 2016

RECOMMENDATION:

The Acting President recommends that the Board of Trustees adopt the attached

updated resolution regarding signature authority for the University of Louisville.

BACKGROUND:

The resolution is updated to reflect the appointments of the Acting President,

Neville G. Pinto, and the Acting Executive Vice President and University Provost, Dale

B. Billingsley.

Board Action:

Passed________________

Did not Pass ___________

Other ________________

________________________

Secretary

117/121


RESOLUTION ON SIGNATURE AUTHORITY

September 22, 2016

WHEREAS, the Acting President, or his designee (appropriately documented),

Acting Executive Vice President/Provost, Sr. Vice President for Finance and

Administration and CFO/COO, Senior Associate Vice President for Business Affairs, and

Director of Purchasing are officers or agents of the University of Louisville and are

empowered to execute contracts on behalf of the University of Louisville pursuant to

their respective administrative duties, including contracts with federal and other

governmental agencies; and


Acting Executive Vice President/Provost, Sr. Vice President for Finance and

Administration and CFO/COO, Controller & Treasurer, and Assistant Treasurer are

officers or agents of the University of Louisville and are empowered to endorse for sale

or subscription any securities or rights belonging to the University of Louisville; and


Acting Executive Vice President/Provost, and Interim Executive Vice President/Health

Affairs are officers or agents of the University of Louisville and are empowered to enter

into and execute on behalf of the University and its affiliated entities all 1) service

agreements and 2) provider and reimbursement related contracts for clinical activities and

professional health care services; and


Acting Executive Vice President/Provost, Vice President for University Advancement,

and Associate Vice President for University Advancement are officers or agents of the

University of Louisville and are empowered to execute gift receipts and U.S. Internal

Revenue Service forms pertaining to gift reports; and


Acting Executive Vice President/Provost, and Associate Vice President for

Communications and Marketing are officers or agents of the University of Louisville and

are empowered to execute contracts and filings related to use of the name or marks of the

University of Louisville for commercialization and marketing on behalf of the

University; and


Acting Executive Vice President/Provost, Interim Executive Vice President for Health

Affairs, Associate Provost for Programs, Planning, and Budget, and Dean of

Interdisciplinary and Graduate Studies are officers or agents of the University of

Louisville and are empowered to sign educational affiliation agreements, excluding

118/121

international affiliations, that do not involve any significant financial commitment or

liability for the University and can be dissolved within two years of decision to terminate

relationship; and


Acting Executive Vice President/Provost, Interim Executive Vice President for Health

Affairs, and Associate Provost are officers or agents of the University of Louisville and

are empowered to sign all international affiliation agreements for all university units

which do not involve any significant financial commitment or liability for the University

and can be dissolved within two years of decision to terminate relationship;

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the actions of these authorized

officers are hereby, in all respects, ratified, confirmed, and approved by the Board of

Trustees of the University of Louisville; and

FURTHER RESOLVED, that this action on September 22, 2016 of the Board of

Trustees supersedes any and all previous signature authority as described in this

resolution.

CERTIFICATE

I certify that I am the duly qualified Secretary of the Board of Trustees of the

University of Louisville, that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted at the

regular meeting of the Board of Trustees which was duly held on the 22nd day of

September 2016, at which meeting a quorum was present and a majority of members

present voted in favor of the adoption of such resolution. I further certify that such

resolution is in full force as of this date.

_____________________________________________

Secretary, University of Louisville Board of Trustees

119/121



CONCERNING LITIGATION AND SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY


The initiation of litigation on behalf of the Board of Trustees as a body corporate and/or the

University of Louisville shall require the approval of the Board of Trustees. Any litigation

initiated with the approval of the Board of Trustees may be settled only with the approval of the

Board of Trustees. In all other cases, the Board of Trustees delegates to the President or the

President’s designee, in consultation with the University’s General Counsel, the authority to

approve and execute on behalf of the Board of Trustees as a body corporate and/or the University

of Louisville and/or the University’s employees, the settlement of litigation matters or

administrative claims including the payment of up to $250,000 in damages and costs.

The President, the President’s designee, and/or the General Counsel are each authorized to take

all actions necessary to effect and complete the transactions outlined above including the

execution of documents on behalf of the Board of Trustees and/or the University per this

authorization. Any third party may rely on this Resolution unless and until they have actual

notice of its amendment or repeal.

Board Action:

Passed: _____

Did not Pass: _____

Other: _____

Date: _____

Approved by:

________________________

Secretary

120/121

RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES TO AUTHORIZE THE

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE TO TAKE ACTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF

TRUSTEES DUE TO QUARTERLY MEETING SCHEDULE


RECOMMENDATION:

The Chair recommends that the Board authorize the Executive Committee to take action

on behalf of the Board of Trustees on the following:

Adopt Grawemeyer Awards for 2016;

Adopt Trustees Award for 2015 (to be conferred at December Commencement);

Time-sensitive personnel actions and personnel policy revisions;

Time-sensitive Capital Construction projects;

Time-sensitive financing actions;

Designations and awards;

Other matters of housekeeping nature, including but not limited to, the Endowment

Match Report.

BACKGROUND:

With a Quarterly Meeting Schedule, the Chairman requests that the Board authorize the

Executive Committee to act for the Board of Trustees following each meeting on business items

that require action between meetings of the full Board.

Board Action:

Passed: ______

Did not Pass: ____

Other: _________

Date: __________

__________________________________ Secretary

121/121