1. Purpose and Scope
Senior administrators, like all KGI employees, are reviewed by their direct supervisors on an annual basis to recognize their accomplishments and provide feedback for improvement. The annual evaluation process is comprehensive by addressing all dimensions of the senior administrator's responsibilities. This policy strengthens the evaluation process with input from all appropriate constituencies related to the senior administrator’s responsibilities on a periodic basis; i.e. 360 review.
This policy formalizes the periodic 360 review of senior administrators. It provides the campus community the opportunity to give feedback on the work of senior administrators and input into their performance evaluations every three years. These periodic reviews assist the senior administrator’s direct supervisor in comprehensively assessing their eFectiveness in meeting strategic goals and operational expectations through constructive observations and guidance for improvement. These reviews are also instrumental in guiding the professional growth and development of senior administrators.
Where not otherwise specified, the words ‘senior administrators’ as used in this policy mean only members of the President’s Cabinet and the Academic AFairs Leadership Team (AALT); i.e. Provost’s direct reports. The President is the direct supervisor of the members of the President’s Cabinet, and the Provost is the direct supervisor of the Academic Leadership Team.
2. Timing of Review
The 360 review of senior administrators takes place after the first three years of service of the incumbent and every five years thereafter. The review is initiated in the fall semester immediately following the appropriate service anniversary of the incumbent and shall be concluded by the end of the following spring semester. The President may at any time advance or postpone a review for operational considerations.
3. Composition, Recruitment, and Appointment of Review Committee
The size of the Review Committee shall be manageable while allowing for suFiciently broad representation of KGI. Faculty, students, and staF shall be represented. Consideration should be given to representation of the diversity of the campus. If appropriate, alumni and community representatives may serve on the Review Committee.
3.1 Composition of Review Committee
The Review Committee shall be composed of 9 members designated by the President (Provost for AALT reviews):
- Three full-time faculty members, all elected by Faculty Assembly – no more than one from any academic school,
- Three full-time staff members selected from staff nominations – no more than one from any academic school,
- One member of the community or one student elected by Student Government,
- One academic dean, and
- One KGI senior administrator.
3.2 Recruitment Procedures
Recruitment of the faculty shall be arranged and conducted by the Faculty Assembly upon request the request of the President (Provost for AALT reviews).
Recruitment of the staF shall be arranged and conducted by the OFice of the President (OFice of the Provost for AALT reviews). Nominations procedures will be set up for staF members to self-nominate with a written statement reflecting their interest and qualifications for serving on the Review Committee including their experience with the incumbent’s work.
Recruitment and election of a student representative (if applicable) shall be arranged and conducted by the President of Student Government.
Campus leadership is expected to encourage faculty and staF from their respective areas to serve on the Review Committee so that the resulting ballots, as best as possible, reflect the diverse nature of the programs, students, and faculty across the institution.
3.3 Appointment
Three faculty shall be selected and designated to the Review Committee by the President (Provost for AALT reviews) from the six faculty (two per academic school) receiving the most votes in the election conducted by the Faculty Assembly.
Three staF members shall be selected from the nominations pool and designated to the Review Committee by the President (Provost for AALT reviews).
Where applicable, the student receiving the most votes in the election conducted by the Student Government shall be designated to the Review Committee by the President (Provost for AALT reviews).
The President (Provost for AALT reviews) shall appoint one member of the community (if applicable), one academic dean, and one KGI senior administrator to the Review Committee.
Following elections and prior to finalizing appointments, the President (Provost for AALT reviews) shall review the committee membership and consider the extent to which the Review Committee is a representative group. The review may include, but is not limited to, representation of the academic programs, functional areas, and the various identities, demographics, expertise, and experience. If the membership appears insuFiciently representative, the President (Provost for AALT reviews) may appoint up to two additional members to the Review Committee to improve representation.
The President (Provost for AALT reviews) shall designate one member as the Review Committee Chair.
4. The Review Process
4.1 Review Criteria
The Review Committee, in consultation with the President (Provost for AALT reviews), shall specify the criteria for evaluating the incumbent's job performance, based upon the incumbent’s job description, goals and priorities, recommendations arising from prior performance reviews, and the function of the particular administrative oFice. In addition, available institutional research data for the review period should be obtained by the Review Committee to be analyzed as appropriate for the position (such as data on enrollment, graduation rates, and fundraising). The incumbent shall be asked to examine the criteria developed and to make such comments or suggestions as may seem advisable. The incumbent shall be given an opportunity to provide the Review Committee with a self-evaluation based upon the final set of review criteria developed by the committee.
4.2 Review Procedures
The Review Committee shall use a standard online survey template (available from the OFice of the President) to develop an anonymous online survey instrument based on the final review criteria (see above) to secure appropriately honest, authentic, and fair information from as many persons as may be feasible who are knowledgeable of the incumbent's duties and performance. The incumbent shall be asked to examine the online survey instrument and to make such comments or suggestions as may seem advisable.
4.3 Confidentiality
The survey raw data will be collected and archived confidentially by the OFice of the President and a non-identifying survey report will be produced by the OFice of the President and made available to the Review Committee. The contents of the survey report (data, opinions, judgments, etc.) received by the Review Committees, as well as the Committee’s deliberations, analyses, reports, and any accompanying materials, shall be strictly confidential. Concerns regarding unethical conduct, inclusive of breaches of confidentiality, must be reported to the President (Provost for AALT reviews). Unethical conduct will result in dismissal of the committee member.
5. The Review Report
The Review Committee shall consult with the President (Provost for AALT reviews) before drafting its report. Following that consultation, and at the conclusion of its evaluative activities, the Review Committee shall prepare a written report embodying quantitative and qualitative findings and conclusions from the online survey including specific themes and examples that may come through the survey responses. The report shall include the method by which information was derived from the survey data and a statement of strengths found, and improvements desired in the incumbent's performance with respect to the evaluative criteria. For clarity, the survey shall be the only source of information for the report. Individual committee members shall provide their individual input on the incumbent’s performance only using the survey. As this review process is not intended to be a formal performance evaluation for a continuation of employment decision, the report shall not contain reappointment recommendations.
Before forwarding the final report to the President (Provost for AALT reviews), the Review Committee shall provide to the incumbent a draft copy of the proposed report, an opportunity to meet with the Review Committee to discuss the report, and an opportunity to submit to the committee a written statement. The Review Committee may update its draft report incorporating any new information resulting from the engagement with the incumbent. In any case, the incumbent’s written statement (if any) shall become part of the final report.
A majority vote of the review committee shall be suFicient to approve the final report; the numerical vote shall be stated in the report. All raw data collected for review shall accompany, but not be part of, the final report.
The Review Committee shall submit the final report to the President (Provost for AALT reviews), with a copy to the incumbent.
The Review Committee is automatically dissolved at the time the final report is submitted with no further duties or responsibilities. The confidentiality obligations on the members of the Review Committee remain permanently in force.
6. Action of the President
Ultimate responsibility for the performance evaluation of senior administrators belongs solely to the President (Provost in the case of AALT), who shall use the review report to inform their regular performance evaluation of the incumbent.
7. Performance Reviews of the President
Ultimate responsibility for the performance evaluation of the President belongs solely to the Board of Trustees. In addition to the regular performance reviews of the President conducted annually by the Chair, the Board, in its sole discretion, may elect to follow the process and procedures outlined in this policy to conduct periodic 360 reviews of the President at intervals of its choosing.