Annual Call

Woman with red umbrella walking past red phone booth

Download 2018-19 Annual Call for Academic Personnel Advancement Actions (PDF)
Download 2018-19 Annual Call Appendix A (PDF)

August 13, 2018



RE: 2018-2019 Annual Call for Academic Personnel Advancement for Academic Senate and Academic Federation Actions

Dear Colleagues:

With this Annual Call for the 2018-19 academic year, I write to remind you of changes in policies, procedures, and interpretations that have taken place over the past year. These changes are in the process of being incorporated into the relevant UC Davis policy sections of the Academic Personnel Manual (APM UCD). They are summarized below.

We strongly recommend that department chairs review this information and distribute it to all academic appointees. We also encourage department chairs to discuss important new items and reminders with academic appointees at a department meeting.

Please pay close attention to the deadlines for both non-redelegated (central campus) and redelegated (dean) actions in Appendix A of this Annual Call. We intend to adhere to the deadlines given in this document. Requests for extensions to the deadlines must be submitted to the Office of the Vice Provost, via the Dean’s Office, for Vice Provost approval. Any request for extension of a deadline will require strong justification, and if granted, will not extend the deadline beyond a few days to a few weeks (depending on the cause). All actions effective July 1, 2019 that are normally delegated to the dean for approval and that are not finalized by August 31, 2019 must be submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs for review and final decision.

Thank you for your assistance and cooperation in continually improving the complex advancement process at UC Davis.                                                                      


Philip H. Kass
Vice Provost—Academic Affairs
Professor of Analytic Epidemiology,
Population Health and Reproduction (Veterinary Medicine), and Public Health Sciences (Medicine)


Vice Provost Academic Advisories (AA) are issued during each academic year to describe changes and provide clarification on policies and practices. One Advisory was issued since the 2017-18 Annual Call. A complete list of Vice Provost Advisories is accessible on the home page of the Academic Affairs website or by entering this website address:

  • AA2018-01 – Pilot Program – Reference Checks for Academic Senate Ladder Rank Faculty Hires with Tenure or Lecturer/Senior Lecturer with Security of Employment (6/29/18)

During 2017-2018, we found 6 advisories that were superseded and 23 advisories that could be retired by making updates to the appropriate webpages, forms and charts. The retired advisories now start with “RETIRED” on the website, and we have included links to where the advisory is addressed in our current documentation (forms, checklists, delegation of authority, extramural letter chart, Step Plus pages, etc.). If you need a copy of an old advisory, you may request it from your Academic Personnel Analyst in Academic Affairs. The remaining advisories include:

  • Three of the active advisories (AA2015-03, AA2015-07 and AA2016-08) will be retired when we publish a recruitment handbook and/or when incorporated into the revision of APM UCD 500. 
  • One of the active advisories (AA2015-08) will be retired when the new APM UCD 220 is issued. 
  • The remaining active advisories (AA2013-03, AA2015-06, AA2016-04, AA2017-02, and AA2017-03) will be retired when the appropriate online resources are established.


New – Reference Checks for Academic Senate Ladder Rank Faculty Hires with Tenure or Lecturer/Senior Lecturer with Security of Employment (see Advisory #2018-01): The University of California is committed to creating and maintaining a community dedicated to the advancement, application, and transmission of knowledge and creative endeavors through academic excellence, where all individuals who participate in University programs and activities can work and learn together in a safe and secure environment, free of violence, harassment, discrimination, exploitation, or intimidation. To support this commitment, UC Davis will conduct a pilot program for the 2018-19 hiring year to conduct reference checks on final candidates for academic appointments with tenure or security of employment. The current faculty hiring process solicits information regarding candidates’ qualifications through outside letters. The pilot reference check program will enable UC Davis to obtain and review information about candidates’ conduct in their previous appointments that may be important to the appointment decision. The reference checks do not involve any process for criminal background checks, which are covered by other University policies. Refer to the Advisory for further details.

New – Search Committee Chair Survey: In collaboration with an ADVANCE PAID grant held by the UC Office of the President, a survey for search committee chairs, designed to assess search practices employed as part of a faculty search, has been implemented within UC Recruit. We will use the responses to examine whether any practices recently employed at UC Davis and system-wide are associated with diverse faculty pools and hires. We also aim to identify untested "best practices" that might be useful in future job searches.

Completion of the survey was optional but strongly encouraged during the pilot years (2016-2017 and 2017-2018). Starting in 2018-2019, completion of the survey will be required in order for the department to submit the Search Report. The survey becomes available in UC Recruit to Search Committee Chairs as soon as an open search has applicants. Search Committee Chairs must click on the light orange-colored banner labeled, “Committee Chair Survey: Survey not started.” The banner can be found in the top right corner of each page within the applicable Senate recruitment. Thank you in advance for taking the time to respond candidly to this survey module.

New – System-wide Guidelines: Search Waivers for Academic Appointees: These guidelines were approved by the Office of the President in October of 2017. Please find the guidelines posted on our website at As explained in the 2017-2018 annual call, UC Davis adopted these guidelines with the following two exceptions that we will keep as UC Davis guidelines:

  1. The duration of appointment for Junior Specialists hired under the search waiver criteria for emergency hires is limited to 2 months.
  2. The Non-Senate Faculty and Other Academics search waiver criterion for Spousal/Partner Hire is also available if the successful recruitment and retention of Specialists in Cooperative Extension is ultimately dependent on an academic appointment for his or her spouse/partner.

All search waiver requests must be submitted via UC Recruit. Please remember we also provide a delegation of authority chart to help outline the new criteria.


Clarification – Target of Excellence (TOE) Recruitments: The TOE recruitment process on the Academic Affairs website was updated to move consultation with the dean into the "concept development process,” instead of much later in the “nomination approval process.” This modification is to provide earlier conversations regarding the likelihood of resources being available for the potential TOE hire, and if so, for what academic year.

Reminder: There are four stages to a TOE recruitment process: (1) the Consultation stage that includes concept development and nomination, (2) the Search Waiver stage that is completed in UC Recruit, (3) the Recruitment stage, and (4) the Appointment stage. Only at the fourth stage are departments allowed to solicit extramural letters or formal application statements from the potential candidate. The TOE recruitment process and steps are described in detail on the Academic Affairs website:

Reminder – Revised Expectations Regarding Initial Off-Scale Salaries for New Faculty Hires: All new academic hires will be provided a compensation package in which they receive no less than the average off-scale salary for appointees within your unit who are within the same title series and salary scale. These new off-scale requirements have several implications for our recruitment process.

  • If a candidate is to be offered less than the relevant average off-scale salary, the dean must make a compelling case to the VP-AA for an exception.
  • Deans will no longer need to request VP-AA approval of off-scale salaries for new hires that are equal to the relevant unit mean or up to $4000 above that mean. To speed processing, requests for approval of off-scale salaries above that +$4000 limit should also include the average, relevant off-scale salary for comparison and justification.

Recruitment offers typically specify total salary, with the final off-scale salary ultimately determined by the hiring rank and step. Should a new hire be approved for appointment at a higher rank or step than anticipated, the dean must still provide an off-scale salary no less than the unit average.

However, we were recently informed by Office of the President that we are bound by APM 510 when it comes to offering an off-scale component for a new hire who is from another UC campus. This could potentially result in an inequity because the salary limit may cause the proposed off-scale to fall below the hiring unit’s mean off-scale for new hires. Please carefully monitor these cases and consult Academic Affairs if you have questions.

Reminder – Academic Appointments Requiring UC Recruit: All academic appointments, including appointments via change in department or change in title, adding a joint WOS appointment, etc., must be pre-approved through UC Recruit prior to submitting the action in MyInfoVault by utilizing one of the following options:

  • an open recruitment,
  • an appropriate search waiver, or
  • an appropriate exemption.

Please review the Guiding Principles: Search Waiver for Academic Appointees document to make certain that an appropriate category is selected based on the definitions provided in this document before submitting a search waiver or exemption request in UC Recruit. If there is uncertainty about a category, please consult with the dean’s office analyst first. If additional guidance is needed, the deans’ analysts are asked to consult with their assigned Academic Affairs manager. If any type of appointment action comes forward and there is no corresponding item in UC Recruit, then the appointment action may be delayed until one is completed.

Reminder – Required STEAD-certification for Members of Faculty Recruitment Committees: All members of faculty recruitment committees must be STEAD-certified, or certified through participation in School of Medicine (SOM) recruitment workshops, before the evaluation of applicants begins. The STEAD workshop schedule can be found at Registration for the School of Medicine workshops can be found at:

  • STEAD certification expires after three academic years. A faculty member who participated in STEAD or SOM workshops during the 2015-16 academic year will retain certification until June 30, 2019.
  • SOM/SON faculty may also participate in the STEAD program to become certified.
  • Non-UCD members of a search committee must also be certified.

Reminder – Position Descriptions for Junior Specialists: Guidance on the hiring criteria for the Junior Specialist series and writing the position description is available on the Academic Affairs website ( Employees who are not as deeply involved in the academic evaluative parts of the research program are likely to be a better fit for the Staff Research Associate (SRA) or Lab Assistant series, and in such cases, departments should consider reclassifying the position descriptions for current Junior Specialists into the appropriate staff title.

Reminder – Faculty Recruitment Start-Up Approval: Review and approval from the Office of the Provost is required before transmitting any tentative offer letter (TOL) to a faculty candidate in a recruitment that meets either of the following criteria: 1) resources have been promised that total $1M or more; or 2) the candidate’s program may require a significant renovation or capital expense need. Prior to negotiating or finalizing negotiations with a candidate, please submit a draft of the TOL, start-up offer or resource letter with an explanation of your expected funding source and/or space plan. Timing is critical in these negotiations, and so the Provost commits to responding within two business days. Please submit these requests for approval to All requests should be copied to More information can be found at the following website:

Reminder – Exemptions from Search/Search Waivers: According to the new UC-wide guidelines, there are a few types of academic hires that do not require an open recruitment or a search waiver; these are called “exempt hires.” Effective July 1, 2017, all exempt hires must be processed using UC Recruit following all guidelines and delegations. Staff members processing these requests should review the 6-minute training video offered by the UC Recruit development team, available at:

Reminder – Family-friendly Recruitment Update: In 2012, UC Davis implemented a family-friendly recruitment practice to make it easier for recruited candidates who are parents of very young children to participate in on-campus interviews for faculty positions. This practice allows the reimbursement of travel and hotel expenses for a second person to accompany the prospective faculty mother (or single parent of either gender) of a breast- or bottle-feeding child under the age of two. Reimbursable hotel expenses may also include the costs associated with providing a crib in the hotel room (up to $200). Deans are responsible for approving and paying these reimbursements. However, all reimbursement approvals under the Family-friendly Recruitment practice must trigger the issuance of a 1099 tax form to the candidate. In addition, as an interim measure until UC-wide policy is revised, all reimbursement approvals must be routed to Academic Affairs for final approval by the Vice Provost as an exception to policy.

Reminder – Two-stage Interviews during faculty recruitments: Two-stage interview processes are becoming increasingly common in faculty recruitments. If the department plans to conduct preliminary interviews, either in person or remotely, the process must be described in their approved search plan prior to accepting applications. If preliminary interviews are to be conducted, a Shortlist Report must be approved at two stages: (1) prior to preliminary interviews; and (2) prior to inviting candidates for on-campus interviews. For ladder-rank, Sr./Lecturer PSOE/SOE series, and all Librarian searches, the preliminary interview Shortlist Report(s) must be approved by the Associate Vice Provost or Vice Provost. Detailed steps for creating the Shortlist Report(s) for preliminary interviews can be found on the Academic Affairs website.


New – Appraisals for Assistant Adjunct Professors: After system-wide consultation and thorough review of the Adjunct Professor policy (APM 280, and APM 220), we found that the Davis campus was not in compliance the appraisal requirements for Assistant Adjunct Professors. Effective with the 2018-2019 review cycle, all Assistant Adjunct Professors will be required to go through an appraisal review in their fourth year of service. This appraisal review is a non-redelegated action decided by the Vice Provost-Academic Affairs, with recommendations from the department, dean and the Committee on Academic Personnel-Oversight Committee. The Delegation of Authority has been appropriately updated.

New – Step Plus Supplements: No new Step Plus Supplements will be awarded for actions that result in a greater-than-one-step advancement. The supplement was created to make up for the fact that the campus was phasing out accelerations-in-time for merit actions and to incentivize candidates to wait for normative time to pursue their action during the pilot. The Step Plus pilot ended with the 2016-2017 review cycle, which was the last year that acceleration-in-time merit actions were permitted. The only acceleration-in-time option that remains permissible is for promotions; however, those acceleration-in-time promotions are limited to a one-step promotion. Now that acceleration-in-time merit actions are no longer permitted, the supplement no longer serves a purpose; indeed, it was never originally envisioned to last beyond the three-year Step Plus pilot. The existing supplements awarded during the pilot (through the 2016-2017 review cycle) will continue through their current end dates at their current rate.

New – Deadlines for Academic Reviews: Please find in Appendix A updated deadlines for the academic review process. These deadlines are the latest possible dates: 1) by which candidates must submit their finalized materials to the department; 2) for departments to submit dossiers to the deans’ office; and 3) for deans’ offices to submit dossiers and recommendations to the Academic Senate (redelegated) and Academic Affairs (non-redelegated). Please note: Departments and Dean’s Offices may set earlier deadlines.

For 2018-2019, Administrative Deferrals will not be automatic. Nevertheless, the goal remains to have most, if not all merit and promotion actions, other than appeals, completed by July 1, 2019. Authority to grant extensions to the published deadlines and/or issue administrative deferrals will depend on the delegation of the eligible action.

  • Non-redelegated actions: Requests for extensions to the deadlines for non-redelegated actions must be submitted with justification to the Office of the Vice Provost, via the Dean’s Office, for Vice Provost approval. If the candidate has not been approved for an extension and does not submit a substantially complete advancement packet to their voting unit by the published deadline, the Vice Provost—Academic Affairs has the right to deny a request for extension and issue an administrative deferral on a case-by-case basis. Note: five-year reviews and 7th-year tenure cases cannot be designated as Administrative Deferrals.
  • Redelegated actions: Requests for extensions to the deadlines for redelegated actions must be submitted with justification to the Dean’s Office for approval. Deans may exercise the use of administrative deferrals at their discretion.

Academic Affairs consulted with deans’ office staff to recommend a set of standard deadline extensions for actions that become non-redelegated during the review process. The recommendations were reviewed and accepted by the Vice Provost. Therefore, for redelegated actions that become non-redelegated during the review process, the dean’s office must contact the appropriate Academic Affairs analyst team, to establish a new deadline based on the following:

  • 3 weeks standard extension = when a redelegated action changes to a 2.0 step increase action (e.g., merit from Professor, Step 3 to Professor, Step 5);
  • 5 weeks standard extension = when a redelegated action changes to a 2.0 step increase action that crosses a barrier step (e.g., merit from Professor, Step 4 to Professor, Step 6);
  • 8 weeks standard extension = when a redelegated action changes to one which now requires extramural letters (e.g., merit from Professor, Step 8.5 to Professor, Above Scale, or a merit that is returned by the central review committee for consideration as a promotion).
  • Any requests for longer or additional extensions beyond these standard extensions must be submitted with strong justification to Academic Affairs for the Vice Provost’s consideration.

New – Service on Editorial Boards: A hyperlink to the list of the editorial board is required in MyInfoVault for all service activities on Editorial Boards to prove membership. All dossiers containing inadequate links will be returned for correction, which will result in delaying the review and final decision on the action. Please include a statement that a website does not exist in those rare cases where one is not available,

New – Service Activities and End Dates: With regards to service activities, do not enter “current” in the “end date” field. The projected end date of the service or the end date of the current review period for the action should be used.

New – Service Activities for Federation Members: In consultation with the Joint Academic Federation-Senate Personnel Committee (JPC), advice regarding whether laboratory management, maintenance and/or safety activities constitutes research versus service is provided in the Federation

FAQs on the Academic Affairs website at:

New – Chair’s Confidential Letter (letter from the chairperson per APM 160-20(b)(1)(b)): The Chair’s Confidential Letter will automatically be provided to the candidate at the conclusion of the personnel action. The name of the letter writer will continue to be redacted, as is the current practice, per APM 160-20(c)(4): “… redaction shall consist of the removal of the name, title, organizational/institutional affiliation, and relational information contained below the signature block of the letter of evaluation.”

New – Upload Final Decision Correspondence: Effective immediately, it is required that all final decision correspondence be uploaded into MyInfoVault by the office responsible for the final decision, in order to provide the candidate with the most accurate archive in MyInfoVault. This upload should only include letters addressed to the candidate, such as letters for:

  • Appointment
  • Promotion
  • Appraisal
  • Above-Scale Distinguished Professor
  • Emeritus Status
  • Endowed Chair Appointment/Reappointment
  • Initial Continuing Appointment
  • Department Chair Reappointment


Reminder – Greater than 1.0 Step Advancements: When the Department, FPC or Dean recommends a greater than 1.0 step advancement, the applicable area(s) of review (e.g., scholarly and creative activity, teaching, university and public service, professional competence and activities) must be identified and include supporting narrative for which outstanding performance is deemed to warrant the extra half step recommendation. Furthermore, if a dean recommends a 2.0 step advancement on an action that was previously redelegated, or greater than 1.0 step advancement that crosses a barrier step, the dean must write a strong recommendation letter themselves in support of the higher advancement.

Reminder – New Deadline for Submitting Materials to Review Files: Effective with the 2017-2018 review cycle, materials submitted for review must include only activities and achievements dated no later than September 30. For example: a journal article accepted as in-press on October 12, 2018 cannot be included in the 2018-2019 review file. The September 30 deadline does not apply to a candidate undergoing review for promotion to Associate rank in their “seventh year” of service. For such “seventh year” tenure cases, additional dossier materials may be submitted until the final decision is made. Please be sure to communicate this information to all academic members of your unit(s).

Reminder – Academic Federation Advancement Eligibility Form: This form is required for Federation advancement actions and is available on our website.

Reminder – Assistant Professors hired 6/30/2016: According to APM 133, one may not serve as an Assistant Professor for more than eight years. Assistant Professors are also entitled to one year's notice should the University not continue their employment after two or more years of service.  Accordingly, in the case of Assistant Professors hired on June 30, 2016, their seventh year of employment falls in academic year 2022-2023, with a final decision on promotion to be made by June 29, 2023.

Reminder – Streamlining Measure – Change to order of Joint Department Review per APM UCD 220, effective 2017-2018: In the past, according to APM UCD 220 Procedure 3 for Joint Appointments, a candidate’s joint department conducts their review prior to the home department, and the home department is expected to consider all the joint department recommendations in their own review (see steps 14 and 15). However, with the implementation of Step Plus, and the rule that the highest department recommendation becomes the action submitted to the Dean’s Office, the joint department’s review is no longer required to take place prior to the home department. In short, a candidate’s joint department(s) and home department may conduct their reviews concurrently, and both are expected to meet the deadline for submission of the candidate’s dossier to their dean’s office. This change became effective as of the 2017-2018 review cycle and will be included in the revision to APM UCD 220 and all of its procedures.

Reminder – Scholarly/Intellectual Leadership in Collaborative Work: Many disciplines are increasingly collaborative, and this is often reflected in publications that have multiple authors. Intellectual leadership can be a problematic criterion to document in research that requires substantial collaboration across disciplines and areas of expertise. Academic appointees are strongly urged to clearly and succinctly describe their roles in each co-authored scholarly/creative activity in the “Contributions to Jointly Authored/Created Works” section of MIV. Importantly, faculty candidates should thoroughly identify any leadership roles that they played in collaborations resulting in co-authored publications/created activities. Examples of scholarly leadership include developing the conceptual framework for the project, procuring competitive funding for it, inventing or applying novel analytic techniques, making key discoveries, changing the interpretation of findings, and substantially writing key sections of the paper. Faculty are enjoined to avoid the usage of vague or repetitive language (i.e., cutting and pasting identical contributions across publications).

Department letters should be interpretive and analytic in assessing such collaborative research efforts, rather than providing an unnecessary recitation of what is already in the dossier. Because of different publication expectations and research cultures across the disparate disciplines represented on our campus, such letters also should advisedly address the relative importance and weight afforded peer-reviewed conference proceedings and preprints, in addition to journal manuscripts.

Reminder – Entering Committee Membership/Service Roles in the Dossier: When preparing the dossier, please display committee service in the format that displays the committee name once and the years served on that committee, instead of displaying the list of relevant committees for each year separately. When entering service entries into MyInfoVault (MIV), each administrative activity, committee, or editorial/advisory board on which the candidate has served should be listed only once, with a date range included in the “From/To Year” field. For example, if a candidate served as Vice Chair for the past three years, we would expect to see one entry for that appointment, with the dates entered as “2014-2017.”

Reminder – Department Letter Expectations for Elaborating on Service Contributions: Department chairs play an instrumental role in analyzing candidates’ contributions to University and public service due to widely varying expectations of time commitments for committees, review panels, etc. The department letter should provide guidance to FPCs, deans, CAP and the Vice Provost on the amount of workload expended on such service activities, and not merely count the number of activities.

Reminder – Advancement for Part-Time Faculty Administrators (positions less than 100% time): A faculty member who is appointed to assume administrative responsibility in addition to, or in partial replacement of, his or her faculty responsibilities is considered a Faculty Administrator. The following titles are included (refer to APM 241, Faculty Administrators less than 100%):

  • Vice Provost, Associate Vice Provost
  • Associate Vice Chancellor, Associate Dean
  • Department Chair, Department Vice Chair (See APM - 245, Department Chairs)
  • Director, Associate Director
  • Faculty Assistant to the Dean or Vice Chancellor or Chancellor, Academic Assistant to the Vice Chancellor or Chancellor
  • Interim or Acting appointment in the titles listed above

For such faculty, scholarly activity is expected to continue at a proportionate level that would allow for normal progression in the faculty member’s academic (i.e., professorial) series; the academic review procedures governing the underlying faculty appointment are described in APM - 210, Review and Appraisal Committees, and APM - 220, Professor Series. The administrative review procedures outlined are separate and distinct from the formal academic review procedures.

Systemwide APM 220-10 provides the following guidance required for advancement within the professorial title when the professorial appointment is part-time: “Advancement of a part-time appointee with a title in this series shall depend on quality of performance at a level of distinction comparable to that demanded of a full-time appointee, although, when circumstances warrant, a lesser rate of scholarly accomplishment or an extended time frame for review will be acceptable.”

At UC Davis, our practice is that teaching and university and professional service are expected to be in general proportion to the percentage of time of the faculty appointment, reflecting the same quality of performance as is expected for a full-time professorial appointment. To help reviewers evaluate service within the professorial role, the candidate, department and dean should call attention to service that is above and beyond what is expected for the administrative role. In contrast to teaching and service, for which expectations are prorated for the percent-time of the professorial appointment, the continuing growth of scholarly distinction and impact of a part-time academic appointee is expected to meet or closely approximate standards for advancement of a full-time faculty member. This is especially true for promotions or barrier step merits, where a professor is expected to have met specific benchmarks for scholarly impact to be eligible for advancement. Given that heavy administrative duties often reduce research productivity, more flexibility should be exercised when evaluating research and other scholarly work for regular merit actions.

Reminder – Eligibility Lists are live and dynamic in APHID (Academic Personnel History & Information Database): Eligibility for merits and promotions are available in live/dynamic lists in APHID under the Reports menu ( Eligibility automatically recalculates as soon as a final decision is announced on a merit/promotion action, so departments may easily use the eligibility lists for planning purposes. All staff who work in academic personnel may be granted access. The only academics who may have access are department chairs and deans. If you need access, please contact academic personnel staff in your department or dean’s office.

Reminder – APM UCD 285 Lecturer with Security of Employment Series (07/01/15): The UC system wide policy is currently under revision and review. We will update the campus as information becomes available.

Reminder – Recommended Language for Department Solicitation Letter to Extramural Reviewers (include in all solicitation letters): We strongly recommend including the following language in the department solicitation letter to extramural reviewers for all advancement actions that require extramural letters. “UC Davis encourages its faculty members to consider extensions of the (pre-tenure/review) period under circumstances that could interfere significantly with development of the qualifications necessary for (tenure/advancement). Examples of such circumstances may include birth or adoption of a child, extended illness, care of an ill family member, significant alterations in appointment. Please note that under this policy the overall record of productivity and scholarly attainment forms the basis of your evaluation. Time since (appointment/the last promotion) is not a factor in this review.”

Reminder – Faculty membership in Graduate Groups is in itself not a form of service: Membership in a Graduate Group must be removed from the University Service category in a dossier, unless the faculty member is providing service to the graduate group (e.g., serving as Chair, Vice Chair, or member of a committee), that is considered service, and should be included on the list of campus-level service in the dossier.

Reminder – Letters for high-level merit advancement to Professor Step 6: System-wide policy specifies that Professor Step 6 is a barrier step, and so national recognition of scholarship and/or teaching must be documented in the dossier and fully described in the department letter. Additionally, the review period for this high-level advancement is the time since promotion to Professor: some of the high-level merit dossiers for advancement to Professor Step 6 this past year failed to provide sufficient evidence that these criteria had been met. In some cases, extramural letters from national and international authorities may be essential to demonstrate national scholarly impact and recognition, and for these cases, extramural letters may be required by the Dean, CAP, or Vice Provost.

Note: Extramural letters for advancement to Step 6 (or similar barrier steps) within the Academic Federation titles are still required. However, note that Step 6 is not a barrier step for the Specialist series.


New – UC Outside Activities Tracking System (OATS): Our campus will be one of the first UC campuses to implement the new electronic system for tracking faculty outside activities (per APM 025 and APM 671 – Conflict of Commitment). We expect to adopt the new system, UC OATS, during the fall 2018 quarter. Once UC OATS goes live, it will replace our current system for submitting prior approval requests and annual reporting certifications. There will be additional information provided as we get closer to implementation.

Reminder – Administrative Development Leave Program: The Administrative Development Leave Program was developed to allow faculty members who have held an academic administrator positions as a department chairperson or as an associate dean to renew their research program. Department chairpersons or associate deans are awarded a quarter/semester of full-pay leave after five continuous years of administrative service, or when stepping down from their administrative post after serving a minimum of five years. The administrative leave is expected to be taken the next quarter/semester after stepping down from the administrative position. Any exceptions to this expectation must be requested and granted by the Vice Provost prior to the administrator stepping down.

Reminder – Educator WOS (formerly Lecturer WOS): The Educator WOS title should never be used as a way of conferring Instructor of Record status to anyone teaching a podium, for-credit course (with the exception of First Year Seminars).



Academic personnel policies issued during 2017-2018 may be found at:

APM 330 Specialist Series Issued on April 4, 2018, revised Section 330 of the Academic Personnel Manual (APM - 330), Specialist Series, is effective immediately. The revisions represent technical changes to ensure uniformity between APM - 330 and the Specialist Series salary scales (Tables 24 and 24N), previously issued on July 1, 2017. The July 1, 2017 salary scales added Steps 6 through 9 to the Specialist Series; however, the policy was not updated at that time to reflect the additional steps. The revised policy adds Steps 6 through 9 to APM - 330-20, as well as the normative years at each step in accordance with the published Specialist Series salary scales.


Local campus academic personnel policies issued during 2017-2018 may be found here.

UCD 015, Procedures for Responding to Allegations of Misconduct by Academic Senate – Issued October 9, 2017
UCD 016, Procedures for Academic Senate Faculty Discipline – Issued October 9, 2017
UCD 330, Appointment, Merit, and Promotion of Specialists – Issued August 1, 2018
UCD 340A, Appointment of Program Coordinators – Issued August 1, 2018
UCD 520, Near Relatives – Issued March 28, 2018
UCD 666, Additional Compensation/Lectures and Similar Services – Issued January 18, 2018