What's new in DivData Review for 2015-16

A summary of changes and new features released for year two of the DivData Review project.

released 4/30/2015

For All Users:


  • Checklist to Assure Fairness sections are now called “Checkpoints” and have descriptive names rather than numbers.

  • “Review Manager” is the new general term for the Department Review Manager. We are in the process of transitioning our documentation, so you may see these terms, as well as ‘department manager’ used interchangeably.

  • “Department” and “Dept” are being replaced with “Dept/Unit” now that non-Senate reviews have been added

  • “Node” is the term we use to identify the various review bodies, or offices, involved in the review. They are: Department, Division, Senate (CAP/DCAP), and Central.

  • “Doc type” refers to the list of available document types. Selection of the appropriate doc type is important, as they determine which review assignees see documents at which point in the review process.

General / UI

  • more descriptive button labels  
  • review states renamed to fit all supported review titles and types and be more consistent and descriptive
  • additional and more informative notifications
  • drag & drop feature for uploading individual files


  • three main sections: Waiting on you, other files in your node/office; files not in your node/office
  • within each main section, new expand-or-collapse ‘accordion’ groups that segment reviews by title type
  • dynamic filtering to quickly find reviews, manage longer dockets
  • more descriptive/transparent state display when file is out of your node

For Candidates & Departments

Candidate & Dept/unit workflow

File building

  • “Parallel file-building:” Candidate materials and non-confidential department documents and course evaluations may all be added during this phase
  • Some documents are shared at time of upload:
    • “Non-confidential documents” and course evaluations are immediately visible to candidate
      • Departments are encouraged to upload course evaluations early in the process
    • Candidate-provided documents regarding suggested external letter-writers and those who may be unable to be objective are now immediately visible to chair/unit head, review manager, lead reviewer.
      • All other candidate materials still controlled by “Pre-submission View Access” until the file is submitted for department acceptance.
  • Course materials – a new doc type for candidates to use when adding syllabi and other course materials to their file (located on second tab of review file, which has been renamed “Other Materials”)
  • Biobibnet linking – a new checkbox selection method for curating biobib entries on the Scholarly/Creative Works tab

Candidate Submission Confirmation

  • At the time they submit their materials, candidates will now be asked to acknowledge the materials in their review file, and agree that their materials and any course evaluations may be released to reviewers once accepted by the department. This supports both the earlier release of candidate materials to faculty and the ability to send a review directly to faculty review if complete at the time of submission.

Dept/unit Accept

A new view-only state during which the department/unit (chair/unit head, lead reviewer, review manager) audit the candidate’s submitted file materials. They then have three options:

1. Return to candidate (new)

Dept/unit can return file to candidate for correction and resubmission if candidate materials are incomplete or inaccurate

2. Accept and add materials

Follows original Review workflow (dept adds documents, releases for candidate review prior to dept assessment) - used whenever letters are solicited and to add or correct dept materials after candidate submission.

3. Accept as complete (submit for faculty review) (new)

Files complete upon candidate submission can be released straight to faculty review/recommendation upon dept/unit acceptance; dept mgrs need to prep file for review, including setting faculty assignments, before taking this action

To use this option, depts must have all its documents in early enough to meet the policy-set period for candidate review/response (i.e. at least (10)(5) days prior to candidate submission deadline); notify candidate (outside system) once all materials have been added.

Reviewing faculty get earlier access to submitted materials

  • Once the materials are accepted and faculty assignments are set, candidate materials and course evaluations will become available to reviewing faculty. This is true for ‘accept & add’ option as well as ‘accept as complete.’ (Note: review manager must set faculty assignments)

Revisions to checklist language

  • Checklist sections are now called “Checkpoints” and have been updated to support all title types.
  • Checklist report includes the new candidate submission confirmation[anchor to “candidate confirmation of submission” above?].

Dept/unit letters

  • Review managers (as well as chairs) will be able to upload recommendation letters to the dossier in Dept/Unit Faculty Review. Chair will still need to certify checklist and signoff on file in system before it goes to division.

Notifications & Email templates

  • Most of the email templates have been revised
  • The suggested checklist response deadlines and references to the candidate’s checklist review period are derived from the number of days set by policy for the given title type (e.g. either 5 or 10 working days)
  • Review managers will receive notifications when files appear in their “Waiting on…” list in the docket.

For Departments & Divisions

Appointment file workflow

Creating the review record

  • To avoid creating duplicate employee records, check to see if the proposed appointee has an existing person record in DivData.
  • If the proposed appointee does not have an existing DivData Person record, use the applicant ‘Hire’ button in DivData Recruitment. This will copy the data from their applicant record to create their person record and prompt the user to create an appointment review record for the person. Department managers in DivData now have access to this feature as well as divisional users.
  • If the proposed appointee has an existing DivData Person record, the appointment review record should be created from the person record or review docket.

New Document Types

  • Application Bundle - used in appointment files, this is for the PDF application bundle from UC Recruit (at this time manually added by the review manager).
  • Offer-related Document - used to add the appointee response and any startup documentation to appointment files. First available in ‘Finalize’ state, after decision to make offer is made. Access for Dept/Unit, Division, Central follows that of decision letter. Senate access not configured.

Business Process

  • The Application bundle may need to be split into confidential and non-confidential for files involving solicitation of additional letters.
  • AP analysts should leave the files in the Finalize state while the offer is out/negotiated.
  • Appointees are not automatically granted access to appointment files. If access is requested, the deciding authority’s office will need to prepare the file by separating confidential documents and creating redacted versions according to policy.

Supporting nonsenate & nonfaculty academic files

Which titles and actions are supported?

  • All non-student faculty and research titles are now included in DivData Review
  • Both advancement and appointment reviews for included titles will use DivData Review.
  • Reviews for academic administrators (e.g., deans, provosts) are not included at this time
  • Actions which do not involve a review of qualifications (e.g., changes in percent time) are not included.

Business Process

  • Some document inventory forms may still be helpful in providing information regarding the terms of (re)appointment (e.g., grant name, funding end dates). Only needed to provide information not included in dept/unit letter.
  • Divisions will need to review and potentially revise procedures for review creation and initiation; capturing funding approval; coordination of visa-related documentation.

Senate review options

  • New field, “Senate Review Type,” supports routing files for CAP, DCAP, or no senate review as appropriate for the given review
  • The CAP recommendation line in the tracking table has been renamed “Senate” and will capture the CAP or DCAP recommendation

DCAP support

  • Divisions now have and manage DCAP assignments: chair, member, and analyst.
  • Workflow for DCAP files is the same as for CAP (exception: no ad hoc option)

For AP Analysts

  • Divisional and APO analysts can now create the Dossier Review Sheet from within Review, and then save it directly to the review file.