Guidance for Optional Statements

MyInfoVault (MIV) allows for the inclusion of several different statements, each used to supplement the advancement review process. Our Step-Plus guidelines allow for additional half-steps to be awarded for outstanding contributions in the areas of Research, Teaching, Service, or Professional Competence. These optional statements may highlight contributions to these areas that may not otherwise be fully realized or apparent in the dossier.

Common questions about the optional statements and their answers can be found on the "Frequently Asked Questions" tab.

Candidate Statement
Candidate’s Statements serve as an opportunity for academics to highlight their greatest accomplishments in all review criteria for their series. For example, academics required to do research or creative activities as part of their position responsibilities are always encouraged to explain the context and impact of their academic endeavors in their Candidate’s Statement so that reviewers can recognize their uniqueness and importance – this is far more important than reciting what is already documented in the dossier. While all areas of research, scholarship, and creativity are valued, candidates often appreciate the opportunity to highlight unusual and distinguishing features of their work, such as influencing public policy, international research and engagement, public scholarship, work with underrepresented or historically marginalized groups and disadvantaged communities, etc. Highlighting such efforts in the Candidate’s Statement can provide important insights not always evident in other elements of the advancement dossier. Rather than factually duplicate what is already available to reviewers in the dossier, candidates should be analytic, interpretive, and tell a story about their research that would otherwise not be captured. Statements are also an opportunity to go beyond merely listing university and public service by addressing the time commitments and impacts. Similarly, candidates can highlight their teaching and mentoring with respect to, for example, commitment, philosophy, innovation, and inclusion, interpretively going well beyond the listings in the dossier.

Candidates can also use this opportunity to highlight the activities cited in University of California Academic Personnel Manual 210-1.d:

The University of California is committed to excellence and equity in every facet of its mission. Contributions in all areas of faculty achievement that promote diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging should be given due recognition in the academic personnel process, and they should be evaluated and credited in the same way as other faculty achievements. These contributions to diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging can take a variety of forms including efforts to advance equitable access to education, public service that addresses the needs of California’s diverse population, or research in a scholar’s area of expertise that highlights inequalities. Mentoring and advising of students and faculty members, particularly from underrepresented and underserved populations, should be given due recognition in the teaching or service categories of the academic personnel process. [Rev. 3/25/2024]

There is a six-page limit for the candidate's statement.
Statement of Achievements Relative to Opportunities (*New)
The Achievement Relative to Opportunities (ARO) framework at UC Davis originated from two systemwide documents that arose in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The first was a December 21, 2020 letter from the University Committee on Faculty Welfare (UCFW) and the University Committee on Affirmative Action, Diversity, and Equity (UCAADE) that discussed the in-depth impacts of the pandemic on faculty, particularly the impacts to academic advancement:

Adjust expectations for promotions & merit advances to conform to Achievement Relative to Opportunities (ARO) principles. ARO principles enable merit and promotion reviews to evaluate candidates fairly based on their individual review-period professional accomplishments by considering unexpected or disruptive circumstances during that period that may have curtailed the candidate’s normal ability to achieve expected outcomes.

The second was the Joint Senate-Administration Mitigating COVID-19 Impacts on Faculty Working Group Final Report (MCIF-WG), unanimously endorsed by the Academic Council of the UC Academic Senate, which stated in part:

The MCIF-WG asserts that most UC faculty have put forth a good faith effort into sustaining the University during the difficult period of the pandemic. Many of these efforts may not have translated directly to scholarly outputs, especially as the pandemic obstructed academic pursuits in many fields. Moreover, clinical faculty were likely overwhelmed with increased patient care responsibilities and challenges. That said, all faculty, regardless of field, had to dedicate more time adapting to the impact of the pandemic, whether in moving to remote instruction or in supporting organizational operations. This came at the expense of research and scholarly activities. Faculty should not be penalized for these extenuating circumstances. Where faculty members have given a good faith effort and contributed to the success of the campus community during a universally difficult time, not factoring in the unique challenges faculty had to work through can ultimately have a demoralizing effect on the organization and lead to costly attrition.

Additional information from Monash University (Australia) has informed our approach, and is presented here in modified form:
Achievement(s) relative to opportunity is the framework that supports a fair and equitable assessment of career progression and achievements over a period of time given the opportunities available to academics.

This framework assists to ensure that the overall quality and impact of achievements is given more weight than the quantity, rate or breadth of particular achievements relative to their personal, professional and other circumstances. More specifically, this provides for the appropriate evaluation of achievements in relation to:

•    the quantum or rate of productivity,
•    the opportunity to participate in certain types of activities, and
•    the consistency of activities or output over the period of consideration.
•    Achievement relative to opportunity is a positive acknowledgement of what an academician can and has achieved given the opportunities available to them and results in a more calibrated assessment of their performance. It is not about providing “special consideration” or expecting lesser standards of performance.
UC Davis previously allowed academics to provide statements about how the COVID-19 pandemic and recent labor strikes adversely affected their productivity, and hence academic progress. With newer and evolving challenges confronting us, we have now instead elected to utilize a more encompassing statement that subsumes these earlier two, one that is adaptable to whatever unanticipated challenges academics may currently be facing. Examples of these challenges include, but are not limited to:

•    residual effects through the end of fiscal year 2025-2026 of the COVID-19 pandemic;
•    past and future labor strike impacts;
•    natural disasters (e.g., wildfires);
•    physical damage to research facilities;
•    recission of previously awarded research funding;
•    government agencies experiencing budgetary reductions compared to historic norms, reducing availability of research funds; and
•    grant review scores or percentiles that would normally lead to funding but no longer do.

The ARO statement allows academics to contextualize these challenges within their own academic experience, explaining both the impact and their adaptive strategies. An important component of using ARO statements is to not only address what an academic was unable to achieve, but how they adapted their priorities to re-balance what they did instead. For example, if less research funding led to less research activity, which in turn meant less scholarship, how was time reallocated? Were the teaching and/or service loads increased to compensate for less research time? How were the adaptive strategies used to enhance the candidate’s academic record during the review period?

The principles do not themselves purport to reward less work overall or reduce evaluative standards, particularly at promotions and barrier steps, but rather apply a flexibility when balancing the overall record of research, teaching, professional competence, and university/public service. Indeed, this approach is consistent with the advice in Appointment and Promotion: APM - 210: Review and Appraisal Committees:

In evaluating the candidate’s qualifications within these areas [research, teaching, professional competence, and university/public service], the review committee shall exercise reasonable flexibility, balancing when the case requires, heavier commitments and responsibilities in one area against lighter commitments and responsibilities in another. The review committee must judge whether the candidate is engaging in a program of work that is both sound and productive. As the University enters new fields of endeavor and refocuses its ongoing activities, cases will arise in which the proper work of faculty members departs markedly from established academic patterns. In such cases, the review committees must take exceptional care to apply the criteria with sufficient flexibility. However, flexibility does not entail a relaxation of high standards.

Academics, in turn, should also use ARO statements to help them provide a holistic evaluation of their own and other candidates’ dossiers. They, as well as the department chair, are in the best possible position to assess disruptions that arose during the period under review that were beyond the control of the candidate, recognize adaptive activities that led to alternative modes of scholarship and enhanced teaching and service records, and contextualize the actual achievements relative to the opportunities available, while not adhering to formal rules or inflexible metrics that may no longer be relevant.

Finally, you are also urged to read the Committee on Academic Personnel – Oversight Subcommittee (CAP) statement of April 14, 2025, about the application of ARO principles in academic personnel review. It is publicly available on CAP’s website and at this direct link here: https://ucdavis.box.com/v/cap2025arostatement, and underscores the importance and value placed on these statements by both the Academic Senate and the Office of Academic Affairs to help our colleagues navigate the challenges ahead in academic advancements.
Statement of Contributions to Public and Global Impact
Faculty scholarship includes engaging locally, regionally, nationally, and internationally, but the full breadth and impact of that work is not always appreciated or easily understood by those who evaluate their merit and promotion dossiers. It is important to understand, visualize, and evaluate the scope of faculty activities that fall under these cross-cutting and high-priority areas for the university. These activities span the pillars of faculty research, teaching, and service. As such, this optional statement provides faculty with the opportunity to specifically address areas of public and global impact in their dossier. Public and global impact may be evidenced by, for example: peer-reviewed publications, high-impact reports, community-based programs, knowledge being brought into the policy and decision-making process, improving professional practice, pedagogical innovations, public exhibitions/installations, grants, contracts or competitive awards, and ways in which faculty public and global impact intersects with efforts to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Submitting this statement may help your colleagues evaluate holistically the impact of your publicly and globally-engaged work and appreciate with greater depth how this work fits within (or cuts across) your research, teaching, and/or service portfolio. There is no page limit for this statement.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Why write a Statement of Contributions to Public and Global Impact?
Academic Senate and Academic Federation members (at all ranks) may choose to write an optional Statement of Contributions to Public and Global Impact to showcase the impact of their public scholarship and/or global engagement across all three categories of the dossier: research and creative activities, teaching and mentoring, and service. While the Candidate’s Statement normally treats these areas of activity separately, this statement instead emphasizes the connectedness and aggregate impact of an Academic Senate or Academic Federation member’s public and/or global work across one or more of the categories. It provides an opportunity to “tell the story” of the impact of one’s public scholarship and/or global engagement in ways that may not be apparent in the Candidate’s Statement.

Q2: Where can I find guidance on how to write an effective Statement of Contributions to Public and Global Impact?
Guidance, including a “tips” document and a short video, is provided on the Public Scholarship and Engagement and Global Affairs websites.

Q3: How is the Statement of Contributions to Public and Global Impact evaluated as part of the merit and promotion process? Can departments develop criteria for their discipline?
Departments and review committees are encouraged to develop clear criteria for considering the Statement of Contributions to Public and Global Impact and to communicate those criteria to candidates. Evaluators should view the statement as a document that adds value by referring to a range of activities whose impact may not be fully understood or appreciated through the Candidate’s Statement or other sections of MIV alone. These may include (but are not limited to) non-traditional scholarly outputs such as high-impact reports, public exhibitions, policy engagement, community-based programs, or championing international partnerships. These are described further in the guidance documents above.

Q4: Is it possible to receive extra steps within the Step Plus system based on a Statement of Contributions to Public and Global Impact?
This optional statement provides an opportunity for the candidate to highlight and draw attention to their contributions to public and global impact that may not otherwise be fully realized or apparent in the dossier; this, in turn, may see additional half-steps awarded for outstanding contributions in research, teaching, and service.

Additional Resources:
Guidance for Faculty on Writing the “Statement of Contributions to Public and Global Impact”
Merit and Promotion Guidance for Globally Engaged Scholars
Merit and Promotion Guidance for Engaged Scholars
Transcript for Video Explanation for Public and Global Impact Statement (12/4/2023)
Video Explanation for Public and Global Impact Statement (12/4/2023)