04.02.01-Annual Evaluation & Merit

01. POLICY STATEMENT. SOHA is committed to providing fair evaluations on individual performance, and we will tie annual evaluation to merit awards.

01.01. See AA/PPS 04.02.01 (8.01) Development/Evaluation of Tenure-Track Faculty, AA/PPS 04.02.02 (8.02) Faculty Development Leave, AA/PPS 04.02.10 (8.09) Performance Evaluation of Continuing Faculty and Post-Tenure Review, AA/PPS 04.02.11 (8.11) Performance Evaluation of Non-Continuing Faculty and Post-Tenure Review, and CHP 04.02.20 for listing of standards related to annual performance evaluation. This PPS addresses all lines of faculty for SOHA.

01.02. See AA/PPS 04.02.20 and CHP 04.02.20 for listing of standards for Tenure and Promotion Review.01.04. COHP 04.02.20 Tenure and Promotion

01.03. See AA/PPS 04.01.50 (7.10) and CHP 04.01.50 Procedures for Awarding Merit and Performance Raises to Texas State Faculty Members.

01.04. This policy and procedures statement intends to outline fair and unbiased evaluation of the performance of all faculty based on expectations of the university and of our SOHA Personnel Committee in the areas of teaching, service, scholarly activity, and collegiality.

02. DEFINITIONS.

02.01. No unique definitions exist for SOHA outside what is already defined by the University and College of Health Professions.

02.02. Outside of responsibilities incident to employment at Texas State University, SOHA fully supports professional development activities, professional and community service obligations, and external employment that do not present a conflict of interest or conflict of commitment.

03. DEPARTMENTAL PROCEDURE (PERFORMANCE EVALUATION)

03.01. In February of each year, the Personnel Committee will perform a performance evaluation of each faculty member, regardless of type of appointment, for the previous calendar year (January – December). Comments and observations from the performance evaluation may be used in the awarding of merit. Comments from the Annual Evaluation may also be used in the reappointment process for tenure-track faculty.

03.02. SOHA faculty should strive to update information in Faculty Qualifications (Digital Measures) by December 31^st, but this date may slip to sometime in January depending on the University’s evaluation cycle found at this link.

03.03. Members of the Personnel Committee will independently evaluate documentation provided by each faculty member from the Faculty Qualifications (Watermark, formerly Digital Measures) system and combine it with university resources such as End of Course Critiques from Canvas, DFW and the Grade Distribution reports from CatStats, and Service Obligation spreadsheet on the SOHA Teams site. Members of the personnel Committee will prepare recommendations to the Chair of the Personnel Committee by February 15^th. The PC and SOHA Director will meet by February 25^th.

03.04. The School Director will meet with each faculty member to discuss the performance evaluation by February 28^th.

03.05. Performance evaluation will be based on university expectations based on the faculty appointment and SOHA expectations based on professional development.

a. Per course Lecturers, evaluation shall be based on teaching, service OR scholarly activity, and collegiality.

b. Assistant Professors (and Assistant Professors of Practice) will be evaluated on all four dimensions: Teaching, service, scholarly activity, and collegiality. The level of service for Assistant Professors will be limited and targeted to their level of seniority in the organization.

c. Associate Professors (and Associate Professors of Practice) will be evaluated on all four dimensions: Teaching, service, scholarly activity, and collegiality. The level of service for Associate Professors will be targeted to their level of seniority in the organization. Tenured faculty will assume greater levels of leadership and service obligations in the organization at all levels.

d. Full Professors will be evaluated on all four dimensions: Teaching, service, scholarly activity, and collegiality. The level of service for Associate Professors will be targeted to their level of seniority in the organization. These faculty assume the greatest level of leadership and service obligations in the organization at all levels.

03.06. Expectations for performance evaluations are as follows. Faculty who consistently meet or exceed SOHA expectations are eligible for reappointment and performance raises. Faculty performance below this line may cause SOHA leadership to consider whether reappointment is warranted for all faculty appointments. For faculty failing to meet expectations, see University PPS, paragraphs 07-12. (values shows are relative to merit: high = 2, medium = 1.5, low = 1, none = 0 – See merit section, below)

03.07. Graduate Faculty must meet additional criteria:

a. Possess a doctorate and a masters, one of which must be in healthcare administration or an approved field closely related to this discipline. An exception to this is for clinical faculty who can demonstrate significant work experience in healthcare administration. See SOHA policy on Terminal Degrees.

b. Document at least one year (2 consecutive semesters) of previous teaching experience at Texas State University.

c. Show evidence of active research pertinent to the area of teaching specialization. Evidence consists of published works that meet the elements defined in the SOHA T&P policy.

d. Demonstrate currency in the field and a commitment to expanding personal knowledge by participating in relevant continuing education programs at the regional, state, or national levels.

e. Demonstrate currency in the field and a commitment to expanding personal knowledge by participating in relevant continuing education programs at the regional, state, or national levels.

03.08. The following outlines expectations for teaching, service, and scholarship.

a. Teaching: When

1. Mean score from end-of-course critiques should meet or exceed the SOHA average.

a. Scores are often indicative of complexity of course material.

b. High student scores are often indicative of high grades and a lack of academic rigor. A class of 100% “A”s is difficult to explain during certification/accreditation site visits. While graduate courses often gravitate toward higher grades, all faculty are encouraged to exercise the full range of the grading scale where appropriate.

c. Faculty teaching in courses in competency based programs (BHA/MHA) are discouraged from using extra credit opportunities because this artificially inflates grades, does not enforce deadlines, and does not teach students to get it right the first time around (important lessons in healthcare).

2. All faculty will receive a peer-evaluation on the following cycle:

“Invite” places responsibility on faculty to invite the PC member Performance should generally increase over time.

3. DFW report should be consistent over time, or explanations of aberrations provided.

4. Faculty should attend about 2 continuing education sessions per year. 

b. Service (values shows are relative to importance; e.g., we value university service twice as much as community service)

N.B.: At least 50% of service activities for Tenure and Promotion should be in SOHA service. Uncompensated service is weighed higher than compensated service (e.g., workload release for PD).

¹Activity goes beyond routine duties as a faculty member (e.g., registration duties, commencement attendance, faculty & PC meetings do not count)

²Active participation includes attendance at meetings as a member of the group. Personal travel or outside employment should not interfere with active participation.

³Leadership includes attendance at meetings as a leader of the group or chair of the committee.

⁴Examples include councils, committees, task forces, and special projects assigned by the Provost and Associate Provost for Academic Affairs or the President. 

⁵Examples include councils, committees, task forces, and special projects assigned by the Dean.

⁶Examples include committees, task forces, and special projects assigned by the Director.

⁷Examples include colleges, societies, and associations relevant to teaching specialties.

⁸Community service includes voluntary, non-compensated activities in the community that relate to your profession.

⁹Consulting includes all compensated activities in the community/profession

¹⁰Collective responsibility for the service activities of SOHA (e.g., assistance at registration, graduation, advising, announcements in the class, etc.) as determined by SOHA faculty. Service collegiality is a function of both the quantity and quality of time spent engaged in SOHA service activities.

c. Scholarship. See SOHA T&P policy for specifics of what qualifies. The goal is 2 data-driven research articles published in a high quality journal with an impact factor of 1.0 or greater. However, SOHA also recognizes other scholarly activities. The following table provides value relative to the expected standard of 2 articles.

N.B.: 100% of required research activities for tenure and promotion should be in refereed activities (blind review of the activity with at least two reviewers and known acceptance rate). First author receives higher value.

¹Activity in scope must be relevant to specialty/research area, what is taught, or the 24 competencies in SOHA programs.

²Refereed articles must be in journals considered scholarly, which means it must publish quality indicators such as impact factor in Journal Citation Reports (JCR), acceptance rate, Scopus tier, SCIMAGO, etc. Journals must not be listed on the predator journal list in CABELLS.

₃Grant awards might be considered refereed if the grant went through a blind review process with at least two reviewers. For all submissions of grants, faculty must submit evidence that the grant went through a blind peer review with at least two reviewers.

⁴Includes regional or multi-state activity

⁵Scholarly books or chapter might be considered refereed if the book went through a blind review process with at least two reviewers. For all submissions of scholarly books or chapters, faculty must submit evidence that the material was subjected to a blind review with at least two reviewers.

⁷Invited lectures or groups other than student groups, which is defined as teaching.

⁸Collective responsibility for the research activities of SOHA (e.g., assistance with grant applications, assisting students with publications/presentations, etc.) as determined by SOHA faculty. 

d. Collegiality: Collective responsibility for the teaching activities of SOHA (e.g., giving guest lectures, assisting in curriculum review, and student advising) as determined by the School faculty. Teaching collegiality is a function of both the quantity and quality of time spent engaged in SOHA teaching activities. Service collegiality is a function of both the quantity and quality of time spent engaged in SOHA service activities. Research collegiality is a function of both the quantity and quality of time spent engaged in SOHA research activities. See the SOHA T&P policy for additional information on collegiality.

04. DEPARTMENTAL PROCEDURE (MERIT)

04.01. Performance Raises

a. Performance raises are defined as a prescribed number of salary steps awarded to faculty whose performance during the preceding year meets departmental expectations in all applicable areas of evaluation: teaching, service, or research. Performance raises, to the extent possible, track cost-of-living increases.

b. In evaluating annual performance, the Personnel Committee, the School Director, and the College Dean will consider the faculty member's contributions in the context of School, College, and University needs and the faculty member's own past performance and career path. This evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the School's approved policy for the performance evaluation of faculty.

c. Faculty who consistently meet or exceed SOHA performance expectations as determined by the performance evaluation will be eligible for reappointment and performance raises.

d. Any faculty member denied a performance raise will be counseled personally by the School Director who will provide specific written suggestions for improvement.

04.02. Merit Raises

a. Merit raises are defined as additional salary steps to be awarded to faculty whose performance during the preceding annual evaluations since the last merit raise was distributed (i.e., this may include two or more annual evaluations and this time will be called the evaluation period).

b. In evaluating annual performance, the Personnel Committee, the School Director, and the College Dean will consider the faculty member's contributions in the context of School, College, and University needs and the faculty member's own past performance and career path. This evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the School's approved policy for the performance evaluation of faculty.

c. All faculty receiving a performance raise will be eligible for a merit raise. Once a merit pool is established, the School Director will determine the shares to be divided into the merit pool in the following manner:

1. Each exemplary during the evaluation period equals three shares.

2. Each exceeds expectations during the evaluation period equals two shares.

3. Each meets expectations during the evaluation period equals one share.

For example, a faculty member who received an exemplary in teaching, exceeds in service, and a meets in research, would be allocated six shares of merit. 

If the department is asked for merit levels (low, medium, high), this evaluation would be medium.

If the department is given a total dollar amount, the merit dollars per share is determined by dividing the total shares for the faculty by the merit pool available.

d. The Director will review with the Personnel Committee the final merit awards prior to distribution individual faculty member awards.

e. Faculty who are dissatisfied with the School's final merit recommendation may appeal to the College Dean. See the CHP PPS on merit for details.