Date Passed Senate:________________________
Date of ESU President's
Approval:		___________________________

EMPORIA STATE UNIVERSITY
FACULTY SENATE

FSB 98018

POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION


Date of 1st Reading:____6 April 1999_______

Tabled:____6 April 1999_______

Date of 2nd Reading:___________________

Senate Sponsor:Committee on Campus Governance
Norma Robinson, Chair

  1. Purpose: To clarify and to bring continuity and uniformity to the process of Administrator Review.

  2. Previous Senate Action: FSB 94005, Procedures for Evaluation of Administrators; FSCR 94004, Revision of Policy and Procedures for Evaluation of Administrators.

  3. Definition of Terms: None.
EMPORIA STATE UNIVERSITY
FACULTY SENATE

FSB 98018

Policy and Procedure for Administrator Evaluation


The following are updates, clarifications and guidelines for periodic (at least triennial) evaluation of Emporia State University (ESU) administrators in their professional roles. This bill supercedes all previous Faculty Senate legislation on this issue.

THE CHARGE
The Committee on Campus Governance (COCG), under the direction of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee (FSEC), has the responsibility to implement a procedure to solicit faculty and relevant constituencies regarding evaluation of administrators at ESU as described in this policy.

SCHEDULE OF EVALUEES
This list shall be reviewed and revised annually by the FSEC/COCG as changes occur to the ESU Organizational Chart. (Appendix I)
Offices to be Evaluated
1998-99
Dean, LAS
 Lendley Black
1999-00
Director, Library Services
Jud Copeland
V.P. for Academic Affairs
John Schwenn
2000-01
Dean, School of Business
 Sajjad Hashmi
Dean, The Teachers College
 Tes Mehring
President
 Kay Schallenkamp
2001-02
V.P. for Admin and Fiscal Affairs
 Ray Hauke
Dean, Graduate Studies and Off-Site and Distance Education
Timothy Downs
Assoc. V.P. for Academic Affairs and
Dean of Enrollment Management

W. S. "Bud" Smith II
Dean, SLIM
Robert Grover
Dean, LAS
Lendley Black
2002-03
Assoc. VP for Computing Services
Paul Shields
Director, Library Services
Jud Copeland
V.P. for Academic Affairs
John Schwenn
V.P. for Student Affairs
TBA
The COCG shall inform the FSEC by September 1 of those administrators to be evaluated. The list of possible constituents for the evaluation must be finalized with the COCG by November 1, the evaluation data must be collected by March 1 and tabulated and summarized and sent to the President of the University by May 1.

PURPOSE/PROCESS OF EVALUATION
This is to be considered, first and foremost, a formative action for improvement and growth of each administrator.

The purpose of the evaluation process is to initiate regular, constructive review and provide clear expectations for administrators. An evaluation process allows a systematic documentation of the administrator's performance. It also allows adequate opportunities for faculty and relevant on- campus constituencies (as stated in this document) to provide feedback in a cooperative and collegial action which will positively affect the primary function of the University, improve or enhance productivity and morale, and promote a sense of shared governance.

This evaluation will be considered as an important part of the administrator's annual evaluation. Areas that need to be addressed will be discussed first by the President of the University or respective Vice-president with the evaluee. In turn, the President of the University will work together with the FSEC/COCG on aspects of evaluation outcomes which would affect faculty.

FREQUENCY OF EVALUATION
While other evaluations may occur at varying intervals independent of this policy, each administrator listed shall be evaluated at least once every three years, starting the third year after assuming the position,on a rotational schedule as noted above. Adjustments may be made by the COCG in consultation with the FSEC only to ensure that any new administrator shall have at least one full year in office before being subject to evaluation. Any administrator could request an evaluation earlier than three years from the COCG.

ELIGIBILITY TO PARTICIPATE
The goal would be to contact a limited number of constituents with a first hand knowledge of the administrator's performance. This would be accomplished by the administrator providing the COCG with a list of his/her constituents, including appropriate classified personnel or students. Since some administrators do teach classes, they are already evaluated by students in their area. The constituent list should be based on the ESU Organizational chart. For a faculty member to be eligible to participate in the review process, he/she should have held assignment in his/her respective college or school for at least one academic year AND possess the qualifications necessary to be a member of Faculty Senate (i.e., FS Constitution Article I: All persons who hold the rank of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor, lecturer shall be considered members of the faculty . .etc.)

Each administrator could have a different set of constituents, and each administrator will have input into their final list of constituents. (Appendix II-TBA) The COCG will make the final decision after initial consultation with each evaluee.

In addition, each administrator to be evaluated shall submit his/her job description to the COCG, for inclusion with each survey instrument.

EVALUATION INSTRUMENT
The initial cost of each evaluation is to be paid by the division of the administrator being evaluated. This would include xerox costs, some postage, ESU letterhead and 2-3 envelopes per survey. Campus mail would be used if possible with anonymity guaranteed. (If a second follow- up/reminder was needed, E-mail or postcard would be used.) The COCG will oversee printing and mailing with the assistance of the Faculty Senate Student Secretary.

Classified evaluations will be printed on different colored paper or by using a different print face from unclassified participants in order to aid in interpreting findings.

Five to seven days prior to the mailing of the evaluation instrument, a cover letter will be sent to the selected constituents explaining the purpose of the evaluation, the guarantee of anonymity and the importance of response. (Appendix III) To enhance evaluation participation, the ESU President will sign this initial letter which will be printed on ESU letterhead with a FS/COCG header.

The evaluation instrument (Appendix IV) will contain an additional letter (Appendix V) explaining the importance of the survey (signed by the chair of the COCG), a return letterhead envelope pre-printed for COCG chair address and a job description (Appendix VI) with ample space available to make constructive suggestions.

DATA COLLECTION
The completed surveys returned to the COCG will be compiled including ALL comments, as well as a review of the major themes and issues of concern. A final summary will be created by the COCG.

DISTRIBUTION AND FINAL RESIDENCE OF RESULTS
When the results of the evaluation have been tabulated and compiled, copies shall be distributed to the:
1) The administrator being evaluated;
2) The administrator's immediate supervisor; and
3) the President of the University.

In order to protect the privacy of the evaluation results, the reputation of evaluated administrators, and the integrity of the evaluation process, the University President shall be sole custodian of the administrative evaluations. Completed evaluation forms and other raw data shall be seen only by the evaluating committee and its typist, and shall be destroyed once the process is complete. The members of the COCG will sign a Confidentiality Statement (Appendix V11) before reviewing survey documents.

These results shall be treated with the same regard as any faculty evaluation and shall not be made public or available to any party outside of ESU unless with the consent of the administrator or the President of the University.

Emporia State University Faculty Senate
Committee on Campus Governance
Administrator Review Survey


Name of administrator being evaluated:

You have the option of either responding individually to the criteria below or filling out the three open- ended questions on page two. Feel free to use additional sheets of paper if necessary.
Has vision

Seeks feedback

Advocate for others

Communication skills

Management skills

Commitment

Integrity

Accessibility

Financial acumen

Leadership

Affirmative action/diversity


Administrative Review-NAME
Page two
Please respond either individually to the criteria on page one or to the open-ended questions that follow in your assessment of ----------. Feel free to use additional paper if necessary.

1. What is this administrator doing well?

2. How can this administrator improve his/her performance?

3. I am unable to assess this administrator.

Please return in enclosed envelope to:_________, chair, Committee on Campus Governance, Box ____, in one week. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration and time on this important matter.

Provide comments about this bill to your Division's Senator or to President Judith Calhoun at calhounj@emporia.edu.
Last updated on 29 April 1999.
Provide comments about format to Dwight Moore at mooredwi@emporia.edu.
Return to the Faculty Senate at Emporia State University.