Faculty Annual Reviews

Scope

This policy applies to full-time faculty of Indiana University School of Medicine (IUSM).

Back to top

Policy Statement

The annual review serves as an opportunity for a career development conversation regarding accomplishments, strengths, areas for improvement, goals, and professional development needs; assess progress toward promotion and/or tenure; clarify expectations and allocations of effort; provide constructive feedback regarding performance across mission areas, and if areas for improvement are noted, to develop an improvement plan.

Back to top

Reason for Policy

IUSM is dedicated to supporting the vitality of faculty members throughout their careers across the teaching, research, and service missions. The annual faculty review is a key part of the career development process.   

Annual reviews are required for full-time faculty, including tenured, tenure track, clinical track, scientist track, librarians, lecturers, and affiliate faculty.  IUSM strongly recommends that all other academic appointees also receive an annual review.

The annual review is a requirement, and it also provides an opportunity to provide mentoring and feedback, clarify expectations, and increase faculty engagement.

Back to top

Procedures

Responsibilities of the faculty member:

1. Faculty will update and verify scholarship, teaching, research, and service activities in the University’s faculty activity reporting system or the annual review document if the system is unavailable.
2. Faculty are expected to address the following items in the annual review:
   1. Accomplishments
   2. Areas for improvement
   3. Any obstacles encountered
   4. Goals and professional development needs for the coming year
   5. Self-assessment in professionalism
   6. Self-assessment in the applicable mission areas.
3. Faculty are to submit their report along with any other documents their faculty supervisor may request for the annual review.
4. Accomplishments, areas for improvement, any obstacles encountered, goals and professional development needs for the coming year
5. Self-assessment in professionalism and the mission areas.
6. Faculty are to submit their report along with any other documents their faculty supervisor may request for the annual review.
7. Faculty members with appointments in a school-wide center or institute (e.g., Regenstrief Institute, Cancer Center, etc.) may be expected to submit a copy of the report to the center/institute director. If unsure about whether to do so, faculty members should check with their department chair, director, or campus dean (or designee).
8. Faculty should come to the annual review meeting prepared to discuss:
   1. Accomplishments, areas of improvement, any obstacles encountered, professional development needs and goals for the coming year
   2. Effort allocations in all applicable mission areas. There should be mutual agreement between the faculty member and chair/director/campus dean regarding effort allocations.
9. Timeline and progress toward promotion and/or tenure (if applicable)
10. Faculty members are encouraged to consider ways the chair or others in the department or school can help them achieve their goals (i.e., more focused mentoring, sponsorship or nominations for opportunities, professional development courses/workshops, etc.)
11. Faculty members can respond to the chair’s, director’s, or designee’s assessment. If exercising this option, the response is due within two weeks of the annual review.
12. Faculty members should retain a signed copy for their records

Responsibilities of the chair/regional campus dean/director or designee:

1. Review each faculty member’s Annual Review Report and any accompanying documents before the annual review meeting.
2. For faculty with appointments in a school-wide center or institute (e.g., Regenstrief Institute, Cancer Center, etc.), obtain input from the center or institute director as appropriate. For some faculty members, it is beneficial for the chair and institute/center director to meet together for the annual review. Any plan for joint annual reviews should be clearly communicated to relevant faculty members.
3. Conduct the meeting with each faculty member and discuss the faculty member's accomplishments, improvement areas, obstacles, professional development needs, and goals.
4. For those teaching, indicate whether they have met the campus expectations for intellectual diversity based on your awareness of their work and any severe sanctions imposed. Note: faculty members do NOT need to produce specific materials for the intellectual diversity review. The policy establishes that a faculty member meets the expectations unless there has been a severe sanction imposed.
5. Consider ways to help each faculty member achieve his/her goals (i.e., more focused mentoring, sponsorship or nominations for opportunities, professional development courses/workshops, etc.).
6. Discuss the timeline and progress toward promotion and/or tenure (if applicable). While you are not required to involve your primary committee in the annual review process, it is highly recommended for tenure-track probationary faculty and/or when a review is borderline or unsatisfactory.
7. Clarify or confirm effort allocations and performance expectations in applicable mission areas. There should be mutual agreement between you and the faculty member regarding effort allocations.
8. Provide feedback on whether the faculty member is meeting, below, or exceeding expectations. If below, discuss and document the rationale and improvements needed.  
9. Determine whether the overall performance is unsatisfactory, satisfactory or excellent. Note that faculty members can be assessed as below expectations in one or more mission areas and be given an overall satisfactory evaluation with improvements needed.
10. Provide the faculty member with the option to respond in writing. If a faculty member chooses to exercise this option, their response is due within two weeks of the annual review meeting.
11. Sign the form, have the faculty member sign the form, make a copy for the faculty member, and add the original to the faculty member’s department file.
12. Submit to IUSM Faculty Affairs a certification memo stating that reviews of all appropriate faculty members have been conducted, that the signed original forms are in your files and that a copy of the form has been provided to each individual.

Note: Regional campus deans are responsible for conducting annual reviews for full-time faculty appointed on their campus. The department chair’s signature is not required for satisfactory reviews. When performance is less than satisfactory, the chair must co-sign the review and be involved in improvement plans. Copies of annual reviews should be kept on file at the regional campus and in the department’s files.   

What to do in the case of an unsatisfactory review: 

It is critically important to submit the names of faculty members receiving unsatisfactory reviews along with copies of the unsatisfactory annual review report as soon as possible to IUSM Faculty Affairs office, specifically the Director of Operations and Systems.  They will be forwarded to the Executive Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Professional Development for action if required, and a copy will be placed in the faculty member’s file.  A special review under the campus and school Faculty and Librarian Review and Enhancement policy is required if two consecutive unsatisfactory reviews occur. Your cooperation with the submission of unsatisfactory reviews ensures monitoring and compliance with the Faculty and Librarian Review and Enhancement policy as required by the IU Indianapolis Academic Affairs Office.  

Back to top

History

1. Policy created and approved on 30 November 2007.
2. Policy updated on 30 November 2024 to reflect the change in the University activity system.

Back to top