Checklist to Assure Fairness for Excellence Review (Unit 18 Titles)

UCSC-APO: 3/09

(Use also for other Unit 18 reviews where there are confidential documents in the review file)

Type of Action:
Review Period:
Effective Date:

The Candidate's initials indicate that these obligations have been fulfilled in her/his current academic personnel review. Make annotations as necessary. Signatures of both the Candidate and Unit Head are required.


1. _______ _______ Prior to the initiation of this Checklist, the Candidate was notified by the Department Chair/Unit Head or designee of the purpose, timing, criteria and procedures for evaluation (required only when the action is an Excellence Review).
2. _______ _______ The Candidate was made aware that past personnel actions may be viewed during the current review process.
3. _______ _______ The Candidate was asked to provide the following information as appropriate. Submit to department according to department's deadline. Check those items the Candidate actually provided.
  a. _______ Updated Curriculum Vitae or Cumulative Biobibliography with current home address.
  b. _______ Syllabi, tests, reading lists, and instructional materials
  c. _______ Statement of pedagogical philosophy and goals (optional)
  d. _______ Other information which the Candidate wishes to have included in the review file (optional)
  e. _______ Names of persons suggested by the Candidate to be solicited for letters of evaluation. Include brief comments on the academic standing of each proposed reviewer, and relationship, if any, to the Candidate.
  f. _______ Names of persons who, for reasons set forth in writing by the Candidate, might not objectively evaluate the Candidate's qualifications and performance (optional, but if provided, must be included in file)


4. _______ _______ The Candidate was consulted about the NSF appointment to the departmental review committee, unless the NSF on the committee is a standing appointment (i.e., a member of a standing personnel committee).
5. _______ _______ The Candidate was provided the opportunity to inspect all NON-CONFIDENTIAL documents to be included in the file.
6. _______ _______ The Candidate was provided a redacted copy of the confidential documents which are included in the file. Include a copy of the redaction in the file.
7. _______ _______ The Candidate was given the opportunity to submit a written statement in response to or commenting upon material in the file within five (5) working days from receipt of the material. Response due by __________ (date).
7a. _______ _______ The Candidate declines to submit a written statement.
8. _______ _______ The Candidate's written statement, if any, must be included in the file.


9. _______ _______ The Candidate was given a copy of the department/unit letter.
10. _______ _______ The Candidate was given the opportunity to submit a written comment on the department/unit recommendation. The Candidate has five (5) working days from receipt of copy in which to respond. Response due by __________ (date).
10a. _______ _______ The Candidate declines to submit a written statement.
11. _______ _______ The Candidate's written statement, if any, must be included in the file, and may be submitted to the department/unit or directly to the dean. If submitted directly to the dean, it shall remain confidential from the department/unit.
X________________________________________ ___________ X________________________________________ ___________
Signature of the Candidate Date Signature of the Unit Head Date

The Checklists to Assure Fairness have been designed to ensure the following rights are protected:

  1. The right that the University maintain records containing information pertaining to individuals only to the extent necessary and relevant for official University purposes.
  2. The right to privacy with respect to such records maintained by the University.
  3. The right to have access to non-confidential documents in such records, and the right to obtain a redacted copy of confidential academic review records.
  4. The right to request corrections of fact or deletions of errors in such records and to make additions to such records.
  5. The right of individuals to contribute meaningfully to the review process in academic personnel actions affecting them.
  6. The right that final administrative decisions concerning appointment, promotion, merit increase, appraisal, reappointment, non-reappointment, and terminal appointment be based solely upon relevant materials contained in individuals' personnel review files
  7. The right to have safeguards in the academic personnel process, including an effective grievance mechanism, which will provide opportunity for inquiry into alleged procedural improprieties in that process.