INTRODUCTION AND POLICY

Promotion to a higher rank is primary recognition of excellence. Such excellence may be demonstrated in all academic domain areas (teaching, clinical care, research/discovery and administration/service). Promotion to a higher rank implies recognition by an EVMS Faculty member that, concurrent with the honor and privileges awarded, there are continuing obligations to academic excellence, professional growth and service. Promotion shall occur only after an exhaustive evaluation has been made of the candidate's merits. It is the Policy of ODU that EVMS Faculty promotions shall be made in accordance with the applicable Standards of Excellence, the Appointment and Promotions Guidelines, and the framework outlined in this Policy. This Policy only applies to "EVMS Faculty" defined as Full-Time Faculty, Part-Time Faculty, or Community Faculty (as defined in the Policies and Procedures Relating to Faculty Appointment, Promotion and Tenure of EVMS Faculty), who provide clinical, teaching, research, or administrative services, whether paid or unpaid, in the EVMS School Of Medicine ("SOM") and/or EVMS School of Health Professions ("SHP"). All references to "faculty" herein mean EVMS Faculty as defined in this policy.

FACULTY PROMOTION PROCEDURES

1. Ongoing Evaluation

   Each Departmental Chair of the SOM and the Dean of the SHP should make promotion expectations explicit for each faculty member at the time of initial recruitment and appointment, with reiteration and/or modification of these expectations at subsequent annual reviews. These explicit expectations should guide faculty toward their promotion. For these expectations to be achievable, there should be demonstrable opportunity for faculty members to allocate necessary time to these objectives, and promotion should be considered within a reasonable period of time. A faculty member's progress toward meeting these objectives will be judged in accordance with the faculty member's percentage of effort directed toward teaching, clinical care, research/discovery and administration/service. Annual reviews at which Department Chairs of the SOM (or designee) and the Dean of the SHP meet with individual faculty to discuss faculty accomplishments, plans for the coming year, and progress toward promotion, are critical to this process. The annual meeting between Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP (or their designees) and faculty member should result in documentation of all explicit agreements regarding allocation of effort, goals, plans, and performance expectations. At the time a candidate is proposed for appointment and/or promotion, the Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP's letter for the faculty candidate should summarize departmental expectations and goals, and clearly indicate the faculty member's percentage of allocated effort in teaching, clinical care, research/discovery and administration/ service.

2. Time Frame

   Promotion to Associate Professor usually requires between 4 and 6 years following initial appointment at the rank of Assistant Professor. Promotion to Full Professor usually occurs between 5 and 7 years after first appointment as Associate Professor. There are no time limits on these promotions.

3. Promotion Process

   Promotions at the ranks of Instructor and Assistant Professor are not considered by the Appointments and Promotions Committee. At these levels, promotions are reviewed by the Vice Dean for Faculty Affairs and Professional Development ("FAPD"), the Dean of the SOM, if applicable, and approved by the EVP following receipt of the appropriate materials from the Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP. Nominations for promotion at the Associate Professor or Professor ranks are considered by the Appointments and Promotions Committee. Following is an outline of the general process for promotion to all ranks.

   1. Initial and annual evaluation by the Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP. Documentation should include time allocation to the areas of teaching, clinical care, research/discovery and administration/service.

   2. Candidate identified for promotion in a Department.

   3. Candidate submits required documents to the Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP.

   4. Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP obtains letters of reference.

   5. [Optional] Nomination sent to Departmental Promotions Committee for consideration.

   6. [Optional] Recommendation from Departmental or School of Health Professions Promotions Committee to the Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP.

   7. Nomination package forwarded by the Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP to the Executive Vice President ("EVP") in care of FAPD.

   8. Nomination reviewed by FAPD to assure necessary information is submitted.

   9. Nominations at the Instructor/Assistant Professor ranks are reviewed by the Vice Dean for FAPD, the Dean of the SOM, if applicable, and approved by the EVP.

   10. For the ranks of Associate Professor and Professor, the EVP forwards the nomination package to the Appointments and Promotions Committee in care of the FAPD.

   11. Nomination reviewed by Appointments and Promotions Committee, the Dean of the SOM, if applicable, and recommendations forwarded to EVP for review and approval.

   12. If approved, FAPD sends letter of confirmation to faculty member and to Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP.

4. Promotion Nomination Package Required Checklist

   1. Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP Letter

      1. Rank at which candidate is being proposed.

      2. Time in current rank.

      3. Description of candidate's assigned duties, job description, annual breakdown of percentage of time allocated to the following areas: teaching, clinical care, research/discovery and administration/service. Also comment on major changes, if any, in time allocation in these four areas during the candidate's time in current rank.

      4. Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP evaluation of candidate's ability, experience, accomplishments and performance (i.e., outstanding, excellent) in each of the four areas mentioned above.

   2. Letters of Recommendation

      Letters of recommendation provide important perspective on the fulfillment of criteria for the candidate seeking promotion. The external and/or internal letters of recommendation are requested and obtained by the Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP and should place the academic and scholarly activities of the candidate in context of other academic institutions. A faculty candidate for promotion is not permitted to solicit any letters of recommendation or contact the internal/external referees regarding the letters of recommendation. Letters should be obtained from well-qualified scientists, scholars, educators and clinicians who are able to provide a fair and objective evaluation of the candidate's work. In general, a potential external referee should have at least an "arms-length" relationship with the candidate. The nature of the professional relationship of the candidate and the potential referee must be specified in the letter. Such letters should document how long and in what capacity the individual knows the candidate, a candidate's qualifications and professional expertise for a promotion. Letters should be addressed to the Department Chair of the SOM or Dean of the SHP. Specifically, letters of recommendation should:

      • Define the relationship between the referee and the candidate
      • Reflect on the teaching engagement and skills of the candidate (if relevant)
      • Comment on the commitment to clinical practice (if relevant), especially during the period for most recent appointment or promotion
      • Address the extent and relevance of scholarly productivity, including strengths and weaknesses
      • Reflect on the leadership abilities, qualities and reputation of the candidate, whether in a local, regional or national/international setting
      • Comment on the institutional and professional service contributions of the candidate
      • Provide perspectives on the character, skills, productivity, leadership, scholarly context or other qualities of the candidate, especially in relation to expectations at peer academic institutions
      • Any additional insight that may be helpful to the Appointment and Promotion Committee regarding the candidate's promotion and/or academic appointment

      It is not expected for every letter of recommendation to address each aspect noted above, nor would the reflective referee be able to do so. Consequently, to ensure all of these areas are appraised, it is necessary for the candidate to have at least three letters in support of the nomination for promotion from various referees.

      1. For Assistant Professor:

         1. Three internal and/or external letters are required. They should be obtained from training directors, faculty members at the training institution or other professionals with an academic appointment at an equivalent or higher rank than that for which the candidate is being proposed.

         2. They should document the candidate's competence in one domain area and participation in at least another domain area of assigned responsibility. (i.e., teaching, clinical care, research/discovery and administration/service).

      2. For Associate Professor

         1. Three external letters are required. They should be obtained from individuals at an equivalent or higher rank than that for which the candidate is being proposed.

         2. They must come from three different institutions.

         3. One letter may come from an individual who holds a position within institutes/organizations such as the NIH and has previously held an academic appointment at an equivalent or higher rank.

         4. In addition, up to three recommendation letters can be obtained from faculty or department Chairs of the SOM.

         5. They should address how the candidate is recognized nationally or internationally.

         6. They should document excellence in one or more domain areas and meritorious contributions in other domain areas and/or competence in other domain areas of assigned responsibility. (i.e., teaching, clinical care, research/discovery and administration/service).

      3. For Professor:

         1. Three external letters are required. They should be obtained from individuals at an equivalent rank than that for which the candidate is being proposed.

         2. They must come from three different institutions, at least two from outside the Commonwealth of Virginia

            1. One letter may come from the Commonwealth of Virginia, but outside ODU.

            2. One letter may come from an individual who holds a position within institutes/organizations such as the NIH and has previously held an academic appointment at an equivalent rank.

         3. In addition, up to three recommendation letters can be obtained from faculty or department Chairs of the SOM.

         4. They should address how the candidate is recognized nationally or internationally.

         5. They should document excellence in one or more domain areas and meritorious contributions in other domain areas of assigned responsibility. (i.e., teaching, clinical care, research/discovery and administration/service).

   3. Curriculum Vitae and Additional Required Information.

      For the purpose of promotions, the candidate should provide the information requested on the Curriculum Vitae form, available from FAPD https://www.evms.edu/facultyaffairs. In addition, the candidate should provide additional information not already included in the Curriculum Vitae format as required for documentation of scholarly activity as outlined in the Guidelines for Appointment and Promotion of EVMS Faculty. All candidates should compile and attach a portfolio on each area (teaching, clinical care, research/discovery and administration/service) in which the individual has time allotted, documenting evidence of quality of teaching, assessments of clinical service and research, and contributions to the department and school.