California State University, Long Beach
Policy Statement
99-21
October 1, 1999
Obsolete Policy
FACULTY MERIT INCREASE POLICY
This policy was recommended by the Academic Senate on September 23,
1999 and approved by the President on September 27, 1999.
(Supercedes CSULB Policy Statement 96-22; Performance Salary Increases)
I. ELIGIBILITY
1. This policy applies to all Unit 3 Employees, as defined in Article
2.13 of the CSU-CFA Collective Bargaining Agreement. All Unit 3 employees
are eligible for consideration for a full Faculty Merit Increase (FMI).
All Unit 3 employees who submit a completed FAR, as stipulated in
V.2 below shall be considered for a Faculty Merit Increase unless
they indicate on the FAR Cover Sheet that they decline to participate
in the Faculty Merit Increase program.
2. Unit 3 members who receive a Service Salary Increase are also eligible
for a Faculty Merit Increase. [31.11]. [Numbers in brackets refer
to pertinent sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.]
3. Unit 3 members who have reached the top salary of their rank/classification
are not eligible to receive FMIs in the form of a permanent adjustment
to the base salary, but may receive a bonus. All other Unit 3 members
are eligible to receive FMIs in the form of a permanent adjustment,
a bonus or a combination of both. [31.8, 31.9]
II. ALLOCATION OF FUNDS
1. After Service Salary Increase (SSI) funds have been allocated [see
CSULB Policy on Service Step Increase, 99-XX], there shall be the
following distribution of funds for the Faculty Merit Increase program
at CSULB [31.12]:
a. 5% of total campus funds are withheld to fund successful appeals.
b. 10% of campus funds are withheld by the President. The expenditure
of these funds shall be reported as a distinct category of the campus
report required in provision 31.29 of the CSU-CFA 1999 contract.
c. All remaining funds (85%) are distributed to departments on an
FTEF pro rata basis.
2. For purposes of the Faculty Merit Increase program,
a. The University Library; Counseling and Psychological Services;
and Sports, Athletics and Recreation shall each be considered a department.
b. A Unit 3 member whose appointment is not within a department shall
submit a FAR to a department or unit determined by the Vice President
of Academic Affairs, and FMI allocations to the affected department
or unit shall be adjusted accordingly.
Henceforth, the term department refers to any of the departmental
level funding units described in this section.
3. A Faculty Merit Increase shall be of no more than 7.5% of the base
salary in any one-year period. A Unit 3 employee may receive up to
7.5% of the base salary in the form of a permanent adjustment alone,
a bonus alone or a combination of the two. In the case of a combination
of permanent adjustment with bonus, the total may not exceed the 7.5%
of the base salary. [31.8]
4. FMI funds may be used for bonuses as follows
a. Unit 3 members who have reached the top salary of their rank/classification
may only receive a bonus.
b. Unit 3 employees who have demonstrated performance as part of an
activity or project conducted by a team, department or group of employees
may be considered for a bonus. [31.8]
III. SCOPE OF EVALUATION
1. Faculty Merit Increases are based on the record of performance
presented in the annual Faculty Activity Report*. Only performance
while employed at California State University, Long Beach shall be
considered **.
*For fiscal year 1998-99 FMI awards, the Faculty Activity Report shall
include information on activities from September 1, 1997 through June
30, 1998 unless the applicant did not receive a PSSI award for 1997-98.
In such a case, applicants may include information from the date of
their last PSSI but not earlier than September 1, 1996. For fiscal
year 1999-2000 awards, the period of review shall be July 1, 1998
through June 30, 1999.
** For the purposes of FMIs, the FAR for a Lecturer who was employed
at CSULB in any Fall semester may include information activities from
July 1 through December 31; the FAR for a Lecturer who was employed
at CSULB in any Spring semester may include information on activities
from January 1 through June 30.
2. The candidate's record of performance shall be evaluated within
the context of the assignment of professional responsibilities. However,
this does not preclude candidates from submitting information on activities
in support of the mission of the University that go beyond the candidate's
formal assignment of professional responsibilities; the information
so submitted shall be considered.
3. Unit 3 employees whose performance does not include assignments
in the categories defined below in III.4 shall nonetheless be eligible
for a Faculty Merit Increase on the basis of their performance in
the individual areas of their assignment. [31.7]
4. Unless exempted by III.3, Unit 3 employees shall be evaluated on
the basis of the following four categories of performance.
Category I Teaching and Contributions to Student Development/Other
Primary Work Assignment; Category II Scholarly/ Creative Activities
and Professional Development/Practice; Category III University and
Community Service; Category IV Special Accomplishments and Other Achievements
Not Included Above.
5. Unit 3 employees for whom the categories apply, may submit evidence
in the area(s) of:
- Category I alone; or,
- Categories I and II; or,
- Categories I and III; or,
- Categories I, II, and III;
Category IV may be matched with any of the above alternatives.
IV. EVALUATION CATEGORIES
1. This section gives exemplars of activities for each of the Evaluation
Categories. The exemplar lists given below are neither exhaustive
nor minimal. They are simply collections of common activities practiced
by many Unit 3 members in a wide range of disciplines. In all cases
quality of performance will be the primary consideration when evaluating
the merit of a specific activity. Simple participation in one or many
of the activities listed below does not certify an employee for a
Faculty Merit Increase. In each category exemplars are listed alphabetically,
and no weighting may be inferred from the order.
Category 1: Teaching and Contributions to Student Development/Other
Primary Work Assignment. Examples of contributions to student growth
and development include, but are not limited to, activities such as:
- active participation in professional conferences devoted to instruction
- advising, mentoring and thesis supervision
- chairing a department
- collaborative teaching
- creative activities in support of effective teaching
- curriculum and program development
- development of instructional materials
- development of standards and/or outcomes assessment
- involving students in the research and creative processes
- leadership and special contributions to the basic instructional
mission of the university.
- program advising
- teaching and instructionally related activities
- technical support of labs, equipment and other facilities in support
of effective teaching
- maintenance of university labs, equipment, materials, supplies,
safety standards and any other support of environments that require
advanced professional attention.
3. Category 2: Scholarly/Creative Activities and Professional development/Practice.
Examples of contributions to the growth and development of the discipline
or profession, include, but are not limited to, activities such as:
- active participation at scholarly and creative conferences
- activities enhancing the effective teaching of the discipline
- editing of publications
- grant proposals to conduct research in the discipline, to support
pedagogy, or to further the mission of the University.
- presentations at conferences
- publications, exhibitions, and/or performances that advance knowledge
- research and/or creative activity in discipline-related pedagogy
- research and/or creative activity in the discipline
- thesis research and supervision
4. Category 3: University and Community Service. Examples of contributions
to the growth and development of the campus (department/program, college,
and university), the community, campus-community interactions and
planning and participation in professional organizations include,
but are not limited to, activities such as:
- advising and mentoring student associations
- collaborative research and creative activity involving the campus
and the community
- contributions to improving the campus climate -the promotion of
mutual respect and acceptance of diversity in all its forms
- external fundraising and resource development related to the mission
of the university
- fostering of collegiality
- leadership and active participation in service activities of professional
associations
- leadership in faculty governance and campus life at the department,
college, university, or CSU system level.
- mentoring of colleagues
- organizing events and activities for the sharing of ideas and knowledge
- Professional contributions to the community, including professional
efforts which bring the community and the campus together
- recruitment and retention of students and faculty
5. Category IV: Other Achievements Not Included Above. Since some
activities may defy simple classification, this policy admits the
need to evaluate other activities that further the mission of the
University but do not seem to fit in Categories I, II or III above.
V. SUBMISSION PROCEDURES
1. Unit 3 members must complete a properly formatted California State
University Faculty Activity Report.
2. For fiscal year 1998-99 FMI awards and fiscal year 1999-2000 awards,
all Unit 3 employees shall submit their FARs to their department chairs
no later than October 1, 1999. Thereafter, all Unit 3 employees shall
submit a FAR annually to their department chairs no later than October
1, which shall be utilized for the award of FMIs.
3. A copy of the University Standard Report of student evaluations
for each course evaluated during the period of review shall be attached
to the Faculty Activity Report. These will serve as a response to
item I.B on the CSU Faculty Activity Report Form.
4. All Unit 3 employees must indicate on the FAR Cover Sheet provided
by the Office of Academic Affairs whether they want or do not want
to participate in the Faculty Merit Increase Program. Participants
must also indicate the set of categories in which they wish to be
evaluated. Participants who do not provide their preferences on the
set of evaluation categories will be evaluated on Categories I, II
and III.
5. Unit 3 members who have held joint appointments in two or more
departments or lecturers who have been employed in more than one department
during the period of review shall submit a FAR to each department
of employment. Such Unit 3 members must indicate their time base in
each department on their FARs.
6. Unit 3 members who have held joint appointments in two or more
departments or lecturers who have been employed in more than one department
during the period of review, may choose any of the following options
when submitting a FAR:
a. submit the same FAR to each department of employment choosing the
same
categories of evaluation in both departments, or
b. submit the same FAR choosing different categories for evaluation
in each
department, or
c. submit different FARs highlighting activities particular to each
department choosing
the same or different categories of evaluation.
7. If one of the following conditions is satisfied. - the actual assignment
of a Unit 3 employee on joint appointment differs significantly from
the formal time base distribution of the joint appointment - the current
employment time-base of a lecturer differs significantly from the
time-base worked during the period of review The employee may request
in writing (prior to October 1) to the Vice President of Academic
Affairs, that the time base be redistributed for the purposes of Faculty
Merit Increase considerations. If such request is granted FMI funding
allocations for the affected departments shall be adjusted accordingly.
8. A Unit 3 member whose appointment is not within a department shall
submit a FAR to the department determined by the Vice President of
Academic Affairs as in II.2.b.
VI. VOTING PROCEDURES TO ESTABLISH DEPARTMENTAL POLICY
1. Each department must select an entity to evaluate its faculty and
prepare recommendations for Faculty Merit Increase awards. Henceforth,
we refer to this entity as the Department Evaluator. This section
describes the process to be used in determining the configuration
of and selecting members to the initial Department Evaluator. It also
sets forth guidelines for subsequent changes to the Department Evaluator
system within a department.
2. The Department Evaluator may consist of one of the following configurations
of Unit 3 employees:
- The departmental chair,
- A designee,
- A Faculty Review Committee, or
- Any combination of one or more the above at the discretion of the
department. [31.19]
3. All current Unit 3 employees are eligible to participate in all
departmental discussions and decisions specifying the configuration
of the Department Evaluator.
4. If a department chooses to use a Faculty Review Committee, all
Unit 3 employees are eligible to participate in all departmental discussions
and decisions that determines:
- the composition of the Faculty Review Committee,
- the voting rights of members of the Faculty Review Committee and
- the franchise to be used in electing members to the Faculty Review
Committee.
5. All Unit 3 employees of a department must be fully informed of
their right to participate in this decision procedure for their department
and of the days, times and locations of the meeting at which the decision
procedure will be discussed. Such notification must be in writing
and must be given five working days before any meeting to discuss
these issues.
6. For the year 1999-2000 the voting franchise for the purpose of
establishing a Department Evaluator and the procedures governing the
composition and election process for a Faculty Review Committee (if
needed) shall be proportional to the time base of each Unit 3 member,
i.e. 1 Unit 3 member on .20 appointment casts 1 ballot
" " " on .40 " " 2 ballots
" " " on .60 " " 3 ballots
" " " on .80 " " 4 ballots
" " " on 1.0 " " 5 ballots
For purposes of determining the number of ballots an individual receives,
appointments that fall between those listed shall be rounded upward
7. This voting franchise must be used for the initial departmental
decisions regarding the configuration of the Department Evaluator
and composition of and election procedures for a Faculty Review Committee
(if needed).
8. Any departmental election, initial or subsequent, regarding the
configuration of the Department Evaluator and/or composition of and
election procedures for a Faculty Review Committee, shall adhere to
the following principles:
a. The proportional vote allotted to any employee cannot be less than
the proportions described in V1.6.
b. The anonymity of all affected Unit 3 members must be protected
in balloting.
c. All ballots must be written and secret.
d. All departmental dialogue shall follow the principles set forth
in paragraphs VI.3-VI.5.
9. For the academic year 2000-2001 FMI review cycle, departments must
establish their voting franchise regarding the configuration of the
Department Evaluator and/or composition of and election procedures
for a Faculty Review Committee by September 15 for Fall, 2000. Departments
must use the principles described in VI.8 to guide this process.
10. Each department shall forward its policy governing the configuration
of the Department Evaluator and/or composition of and election procedures
for a Faculty Review Committee to the Office of the Academic Senate
within 10 working days of approving the policy.
11. If a department elects to form a Faculty Review Committee and
there is an insufficient number of persons in a department to serve
on the committee, the department may select persons from a related
academic discipline or appropriate administrative unit for that purpose.
VII. REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS
1. Step 1. Departmental Recommendations [31.19]: The Department Evaluator,
VI.1, shall make departmental recommendations. The Department Evaluator
may recommend that an individual Unit 3 member receive a Faculty Merit
Increase of any amount up to the maximum amount provided in Section
II, 3, of this policy. Recommended increases may result in the placement
of Unit 3 employees between the rates for a step of rank/ classification
in Appendix C of the 1999 CSU-CFA contract. Recommendations from the
department shall not exceed the amount of funds allocated for use
at this level.
2. Step 2. Dean's Review [31.20]: The academic dean for that department
shall review the recommendations of Department Evaluator. The dean
may concur or disagree with the recommendations, may change the amount
of any recommended increase, and/or may recommend an increase for
any member of the department that was not recommended by the Department
Evaluator. The dean may recommend that an individual Unit 3 member
receive a Faculty Merit Increase of any amount up to the maximum amount
provided in Section II, 3 of this Policy. Recommended increases may
result in the placement of Unit 3 employees between the rates for
a step of rank/ classification in Appendix C of the 1999 CSU-CFA Collective
Bargaining Agreement.
3. Step 3. Presidential Decision [31.21]: All recommendations from
each department and dean as well as all FARs shall be submitted to
the president. The president may concur or disagree with the recommendations,
may change the amount of any recommended increase, and/or may grant
an increase for any member of the department who was not recommended
by the department evaluator, or by the dean. The president may grant
that an individual Unit 3 member receive a Faculty Merit Increase
of any amount up to the maximum amount provided in Section II, 3 of
the Policy. Increases may result in the placement of Unit 3 employees
between the rates for a step of rank/ classification in Appendix C
of the 1999 CSU-CFA Collective Bargaining Agreement. The total of
the recommendations at this level shall not exceed the pool of funds
allocated to the president.
4. A Unit 3 employee may review, and submit a written rebuttal to,
the recommendations at each step of the Faculty Merit Increase process.
[31.22]. Accordingly, each Unit 3 employee shall be given notice of
the recommendations concerning the FMI by the Department Evaluator,
and the recommendation concerning the FMIs by the dean, at the same
time that the recommendation is forwarded to the next step in the
FMI process. Such written rebuttals shall accompany the Unit 3 member's
FAR to all subsequent levels of review. The submission of such rebuttals
shall conform to the time schedule prescribed for the submission of
FARs to each level of review. 5. Unit 3 members shall not review their
own FARs for Faculty Merit Increase awards. However, the choice to
pursue a Faculty Merit Increase does not disqualify a Unit 3 employee
from service on faculty campus committees involved in FMI decisions.
[31.23]
6. Recommendations regarding FMIs shall include not only whether the
candidate is recommended to receive a Faculty Merit Increase, but
also the amount of the increase recommended for those candidates receiving
a positive recommendation. [31.23]
7. Failure to meet any established deadline for recommendations shall
automatically result in the forwarding of all annual reports to the
next level of review. [31.23]
8. Deadlines for Department recommendations to be forwarded to the
Dean are as follows:
(a) Recommendations for 1998-1999 FMIs and all Faculty Activity Reports
for the period from the last review through June 30, 1998, shall be
forwarded to the Dean by October 11, 1999.
(b) Recommendations for 1999-2000 FMIs and all Faculty Activity Reports
for the period from July 1, 1998, through June 30, 1999, shall be
forwarded to the Dean by October 22, 1999.
9. Deadlines for the Dean's recommendations to be forwarded to the
President are as follows:
(a) Recommendations for 1998-1999 FMIs and all Faculty Activity Reports
for the period from the last evaluation through June 30, 1998, shall
be forwarded to the President by October 22, 1999.
(b) Recommendations for 1999-2000 FMIs and all Raculty Activity Reports
for the period from July 1, 1998, through June 30, 1999, shall be
forwarded to the President by November 5, 1999.
10. The president or designee, after consideration of all appropriate
recommendations, selects the recipients of the increases by no later
than November 20, 1999 for fiscal 1998/1999 and 1999/2000 and no later
than November 20 for years thereafter. The president or designee shall
also determine the appropriate amount of the increase to be granted,
consistent with the limitation provided in Section II,3 above. The
decision to grant or deny a Faculty Merit Increase, and the amount
of the increase, shall not be subject to the grievance procedure as
provided in Article 10 of the 1999 CSU-CFA Collective Bargaining Agreement.
This decision shall be subject to the Faculty Merit Increase Appeal
Process outlined in Section VIII below. [31.25]
11. Faculty Merit Increases shall be retroactive to July 1 of the
fiscal year in which the review of FARs is conducted, with the exception
of Faculty Merit Increases for fiscal year 1998/99, which shall be
retroactive to July 1, 1998. [31.26]
12. There shall be no requirement to expend all funds allocated for
FMIs. Any portion of the funds not expended in any fiscal year shall
automatically be added to the Faculty Merit Increase pool in the next
fiscal year, and shall be allocated as specified in Section II of
this Policy, above. [31.28]
13. A list of Unit 3 employees receiving Faculty Merit Increases,
their rank, the amount of the increase received, and their department
shall be made public on this campus no later than one month after
the final decisions regarding such increases. Awards shall also be
reported by the amount of increase, gender, and ethnicity but without
names.
14. The decision to grant or deny a Faculty Merit Increase shall not
be considered during deliberations regarding the granting of reappointment,
promotion or tenure unless the Unit 3 member includes documents related
to the decision in his/her Personnel Action File. This shall not preclude
the consideration of any facts during RTP deliberations, which are
also considered during Faculty Merit Increase deliberations. FARs
and the notification of all Faculty Merit Increase decisions may be
placed in both the Personnel Action File and any Working Personnel
Action File established for the purpose of conducting evaluations
pursuant to Article 15, Evaluation, of the 1999 CSU-CFA Collective
Bargaining Agreement, at the discretion of the Unit 3 employee. [31.30]
15. The award of Faculty Merit Increases shall not be considered personnel
recommendations, decisions or actions that must be based upon a Unit
3 member's Personnel Action File pursuant to the 1999 CSU-CFA Collective
Bargaining Agreement. [31.31]
VIII. FACULTY MERIT INCREASE APPEAL PROCESS
1. A Unit 3 member who has received a positive recommendation from
the department or the dean may appeal the President's decision that
denies a Faculty Merit Increase, or decreases the amount of a Faculty
Merit Increase that is recommended by a department or the dean. The
affected employee may file appeals of the President's decision, requesting
that CSU grant or increase an FMI award. [31.33]
2. Each department shall supply one Unit 3 member to serve on a university
wide Appeals Panel. The department must elect this member following
the election principles in VI.8. to the selection pool, and it cannot
develop an election process contradicting the principles identified
in section VI.8.
3. The Unit 3 member may file an appeal with the President no later
than fourteen (14) days after receipt of the President's decision.
The appeals shall be heard by a committee of the five (5) Unit 3 employees
chosen by lot from the Appeals Panel elected by the Unit 3 employees
at the campus. Unit 3 employees who are appealing Faculty Merit Increase
decisions shall not serve on the committee during that year. The committee
will hear all such appeals of the President's decision at the campus
that year in a single hearing. If the volume of appeals is sufficiently
large this hearing may take several days. The decision to end the
hearing on any given day and to schedule the next meeting date resides
with the committee. The CSU and the Unit 3 employee (and/or a representative)
may present evidence to the panel at the hearing. A majority decision
by the committee shall be required in order to grant any appeal. [31.34]
4. Five (5) percent of the pool available for all Unit 3 Faculty Merit
Increases at the campus shall be reserved to fund any additional increases
granted under this process. The committee may not grant any increases
that total more than the amount of the reserved campus pool. The decision
of the appeal committee shall be final and binding. Any portion of
such reserved campus pool that is not expended in the above manner
shall be rolled over and added to the pool for faculty merit increases
for the following year. [31.35]
IX. REVIEW OF POLICY
1. This policy shall be reviewed and evaluated in the Spring of 2000
by the Faculty Personnel Policies Council which shall report its findings
to the Academic Senate by the last April meeting of the Academic Senate.
EFFECTIVE: Fall 1999
PS 99-21
|