HR3225 - Performance Evaluation

1. Definitions
   1. Employment Anniversary Date - The anniversary of the first date of employment as a regular employee.  Regular employment is defined in HR3105 Employment Type.
2. Schedule
   1. The performance of each Regular employee shall be evaluated by their immediate supervisor and documented on the College performance appraisal form according to the following schedule:
      1. Administrative/Professional with employment agreements, Support Staff, Confidential Clerical and Trail Point Support employees - annually for the first two years of employment, and then every third year thereafter;
      2. Administrative/Professional employees with continuing contracts - annually during the probationary period and every third year thereafter.
      3. Probationary Faculty - A minimum of one performance appraisal conference using the Faculty Performance Appraisal Instrument is required before the end of each contract year during the probationary period. By March 15 of the final probationary year, the provost/dean/supervisor must present and review the Faculty Performance Appraisal results with the faculty member and indicate a recommendation to retain or not to retain the employee.
      4. Full Status Faculty: - A minimum of one appraisal conference using the Faculty Performance Appraisal Instrument every three years.  During the conference, the provost/dean/supervisor must review the Faculty Performance Appraisal results with the faculty member and include the background of the overall rating of “Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory.”
   2. Performance evaluation forms for Faculty employees are due before the end of the contract year in which the employee is due to be evaluated.
   3. Performance evaluation forms for Non-Faculty employees are due by the employee’s employment anniversary date..
   4. Nothing in this procedure precludes more frequent performance evaluations in the event supervisors deem them necessary.
3. Form
   1. The performance evaluation shall be documented on the appropriate College performance evaluation form.
   2. The employee shall be asked to sign the completed evaluation form in order to indicate that the evaluation has been discussed with them. The employee may provide a written response to the evaluation.
   3. The completed evaluation form and written response, if any, shall be sent to Human Resources, through the appropriate supervisors for placement in the employee’s personnel file. The employee shall be given a copy of the evaluation.
4. Procedure
   1. Faculty -
      1. Faculty Performance Appraisals are designed to serve two functions as follows:
         1. Performance Appraisal - To ascertain and verify the “Satisfactory” or Unsatisfactory” performance of faculty members. This must be accomplished annually during probationary periods and at least once every three years thereafter.
         2. Professional Assessment - A process designed to aid faculty members in their professional growth and development. This is a continuous process.
      2. Provosts, deans or immediate supervisors shall conduct the Faculty Performance Appraisal.
      3. Upon employment, the provost, dean or immediate supervisor shall advise the faculty member of the Faculty Performance Appraisal procedure and criteria to be used.
      4. In addition to the Faculty Performance Appraisal Instrument, sources may include:
         1. Discussions with faculty member(s).
         2. Positive and/or negative comments by relevant third parties. Negative comments shall be investigated by the supervisor. The faculty member will be notified before such material is placed in their file. The faculty member may make a written response to any such material placed in their file.
         3. Classroom visits by the provost/dean/supervisor.
         4. Student evaluations may be required and used for any purpose with regard to a probationary employee. Student evaluations may be required but will only be used for improvement of instruction for a non-probationary faculty member.
         5. Relevant activities by faculty member (e.g., institution building, presentations, course syllabi, publications, professional associations).
      5. The criteria in the Faculty Performance Appraisal Instrument will be given a rating of one of three categories, defined as follows:
         1. Performs Well: Indicates the appraiser’s judgment of performance on any given item to be at or above the expected level. This, of course, still leaves room for improvement of one’s skills and performance.
         2. Needs Improvement: Indicates the appraiser’s judgment that performance on an item is below expectations. The appraiser may choose to deal with this deficiency on an informal basis, or may initiate a remedial action plan to remedy the problem within a specified period of time. Both parties should agree upon the method and objectives of the plan. If no agreement can be reached, the appraiser shall impose a plan.
         3. Not Applicable: Indicates the appraiser’s judgment that this item is not appropriate for a faculty member’s performance review, e.g., counselor or librarian rather than a classroom teacher.
      6. In addition to rating individual performance criteria, the appraiser must also rate the overall performance of a faculty member before the end of the faculty member’s contract year as being Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory
         1. Satisfactory Rating: The provost/dean/supervisor and faculty member will discuss the latter’s strengths and weaknesses, goals and plans for improvement, and related matters, on an ongoing and regular basis and at appraisal meetings. A provost/dean/supervisor could indicate “Needs Improvement” on some of the individual criteria items and still rate the employee’s overall performance as “Satisfactory.” As long as the faculty member’s overall job performance is judged satisfactory, they will be recommended for another contract with all raises specified by the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
         2. Unsatisfactory Rating: If the provost/dean/supervisor marks “Unsatisfactory” on the Faculty Performance Appraisal Instrument, it means that the faculty member is below College standards in overall performance. A rating of “Unsatisfactory” usually occurs only after informal resolution of problems has failed.
      7. Warning Status
         1. Upon awarding an “Unsatisfactory” rating, the administrator must place the faculty member on Warning Status and initiate a formal remediation plan, preferably with mutual agreement upon goals. If not, the administrator shall impose a plan.
         2. It is required that Warning Status Faculty be appraised with the same stringency as are probationary employees, i.e., in an intensive and continuing fashion. Provosts/deans/supervisors will be responsible for conducting no fewer than two formal performance appraisal conferences before March 30 each contract year. However, because of the serious nature of this status, the provost/dean/supervisor will determine the number of appraisals needed to remedy the problem(s). All related documentation must be forwarded to Human Resources for placement in the employee’s personnel file, with written notice to the faculty member. By the end of the final conference, the provost/dean/supervisor must review the Faculty Performance Appraisal results and forward a recommendation whether to rescind or continue the employee on Warning Status. If the faculty member is removed from Warning Status, the provost/dean/supervisor will notify the individual and the Human Resources Office of the action.
         3. The duration of Warning Status shall be limited to the date of March 15th in the subsequent year. The notice of Warning Status will be expunged from the employee’s file two years after the notice has been rescinded.
      8. Faculty Right to Due Process
         1. A faculty member may respond to any findings of the provost/dean/supervisor resulting from the annual or final summative evaluation.
         2. Due process may occur at either or both of the following levels:
            1. Rebuttal: Performance Appraisal Instrument The faculty member may rebut the findings of the provost/dean/supervisor resulting from the annual or final summative evaluation. Provision for written rebuttal is to be found on the Faculty Performance Appraisal Instrument, which is signed by both parties and forwarded to Human Resources for the employee’s personnel file.
            2. Administrative Appeal: Provost/Dean/Vice President If the faculty member is placed on Warning Status and the provost/dean/supervisor cannot resolve the conflict, they may appeal to the Vice President, Academic Affairs.
         3. All pertinent documentation provided during the appeal process must be added to the employee’s personnel file.
      9. Resolution of Remedial Action and Continuance of Probation
         1. One or more of the following actions must be taken prior to March 30 of each year:
            1. Restoration of the judgment from “Unsatisfactory” to “Satisfactory” on a subsequent appraisal.
            2. Deletion or continuance of remedial action plan and/or Warning Status into the next academic year.
            3. Recommendation of continuance of contract for a Probationary Status Faculty employee.
            4. Recommendation of termination of contract.
         2. Whichever administrative actions are taken, written notice will be provided to the faculty member and a copy added to the employee’s personnel file.
      10. Chapter 279 of Iowa Code
          
          Nothing in this procedure is intended to be in derogation of faculty members’ rights under Chapter 279 of the Iowa Code.
   2. Support Staff - Union
      1. Within 2 weeks of employment, the Employer will acquaint the employee with the evaluation procedure, including the evaluation instruments to be used. No evaluation will take place until such orientation has been completed.
      2. A copy of each formal written evaluation shall be given to the employee and a conference shall be held between the employee and the immediate supervisor. The employee shall have at least 2 days prior notice concerning the date of the conference. A copy signed by both parties shall be given to the employee. The employee’s signature does not necessarily mean agreement with the evaluation, but rather awareness of the content.
      3. Within 10 working days of the conference, the employee may provide a written response to the evaluation to be attached to the evaluation in the employee’s personnel file.
      4. Where the employee’s performance is in need of improvement, the evaluator will so note in the written evaluation, and offer recommendations and assistance for improvement.
      5. Each employee shall have the right to review the contents of their personnel file except for confidential information. A representative of the Association, at the employee’s request, may accompany the employee in the review.
      6. Any complaints directed toward an employee which are placed in their personnel file are to be called to the employee’s attention in writing.
      7. The employee shall have the right to reproduce any of the contents of their file at their expense.
5. Records and File System
   1. Recordkeeping is a necessary part of the evaluation process. It formally documents performance reviews. One official personnel file will exist, the College Human Resources File.
      
      This file will contain all formal evaluative records, such as Performance Appraisal results, Notices of Warning Status and documentation, internal and external recommendations, and records and represents the Official College personnel file. When an administrator introduces any evaluation material to the College files, the affected employee must receive a written, dated notice of same.
   2. These records are accessible to appropriate supervisors and the employee, and are located in the College’s Human Resources Office.

November 1, 2011

October 1, 2014

February 21, 2017

July 1, 2017

September 13, 2019

September 1, 2020

July 9, 2021

September 22, 2021