Home | 3 Comprehensive Standards | 3.2 Governance and Administration | 3.2.10 Administrative Staff Evaluations

3.2.10 Administrative Staff Evaluations

Comprehensive Standard: The institution evaluates the effectiveness of its administrators, including the chief executive officer, on a periodic basis.

X   Compliance
      Partial Compliance
      Non-compliance

Narrative:

The Faculty Affairs Committee of the University Senate oversees the triennial evaluation of certain adminstrative officers, with the goal of providing feedback to improve performance and to assist the President and/or the Provost in making reappointment decisions. Administrators evaluated through this process include the President; the Provost and Vice President for Academic Programs; the Vice Presidents for Research, Student Affairs, Development, External Affairs, and Finance and Administration; the Associate Provosts for Academic Programs, Information Systems and Technology, and Institutional Effectiveness; and the academic Deans, including the Dean of Libraries. [1]

Administrators are evaluated by faculty who hold rank as defined in the University Statutes Article V, Section 1 [2] and who hold a contract at .75 EFT or above. The faculty designated to complete the evaluation survey are specified in the procedures of the particular administrator. Administrators with authority over non-academic areas are also evaluated by designated staff members. The staff survey responses are collected and analyzed separately from the faculty survey responses. The evaluators, both faculty and staff, respond to a standard set of evaluation items and space is provided for written comments. Evaluations are anonymous. The Office of Institutional Research compiles the results of the evaluations and transcribes the comments. Statistical summaries and transcribed comments are provided to the administrator being evaluated, the Executive Committee of the Senate, and the Provost. In the case of the Provost's evaluation, the summaries and comments are provided to the President.

The procedures for the evaluation of each administrator are reviewed periodically by the Senate Faculty Affairs Committee. When that committee determines that changes need to be made to any of the instruments, it forwards the proposed changes to the Senate Executive Committee, and if approved at that level, the proposal then goes to the full University Senate for a vote. There are links from the web page of the Senate Faculty Affairs Committee to the current procedures [3] for each administrator, to the schedule of evaluations [4].

As discussed in Standard 3.2.1, the Board of Regents recently approved a revised policy on performance assessment of the Presidents of all University System of Georgia institutions in accordance with the Board of Regent's Policy Manual. [5] This evaluation will be an ongoing process, consisting of open communication between the Chancellor and the President on both individual and institutional goals and objectives as well as on the methods and processes used to achieve them. Each President will be evaluated on an annual basis at a minimum. This process will provide the Chancellor and the Board with an assessment of how effectively the President is guiding the institution in such areas as academic, financial, and student affairs; personnel management; and community relations. This formal evaluation will address the following broad areas: administrative and academic leadership and management; institutional and Board goals and priorities; and internal and external relationships.

Directors and heads of non-academic departments are evaluated annually by the vice president having administrative authority in their areas, while college deans evaluate department heads and directors. These evaluations use both the established performance appraisal process [6] and other criteria specifically related to the goals of the division or college.

SACS Accreditation

3.2.10 Administrative Staff Evaluations

Narrative:

Supporting Documentation: