Print: Summary Body

Gillings School of Global Public Health: Appointment, Promotions and Tenure Manual

Summary

This document establishes the standards, criteria, and procedures governing faculty appointments, promotions, and tenure at the UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health. It outlines expectations across all faculty tracks and ranks in the areas of teaching and mentoring, research, and practice and service, while ensuring alignment with broader University regulations and a commitment to equity and inclusion.

Body

Unit Policy

Title

Gillings School of Global Public Health: Appointment, Promotions and Tenure Manual

Introduction

Purpose

This document establishes the standards, criteria, and procedures governing faculty appointments, promotions, and tenure at the UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health ("Gillings School" or "School"). It outlines expectations across all faculty tracks and ranks in the areas of teaching and mentoring, research, and practice and service, while ensuring alignment with broader University regulations and a commitment to equity and inclusion.

Scope

This policy document applies to all faculty at the UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, across all tracks (tenure-track and fixed-term) and ranks, including teaching, research, practice/clinical, and other appointment types.

Policy

Version June 1, 2023

Approved by the Appointment, Promotions and Tenure (APT) Committee and the Department Chairs of the Gillings School of Global Public Health

Appointments, promotions, and the award of tenure in the UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health are governed by University regulations, as detailed in The Faculty Code of University Government; Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; and Faculty Policies and Procedures. These documents are incorporated herein by reference. In case of conflict, the policies set forth in the University documents are governing.

Note: Some of the in-person procedures outlined in the APT manual may require modification due to the coronavirus pandemic.

Preamble — p. 3
I. Definitions — p. 3
II. General Information on Appointments, Promotions and Tenure — p. 4
III. Types of Appointments — p. 7
IV. Standards and Criteria for Appointment and Promotions – General Criteria for All Tracks — p. 12
V. Standards and Criteria for Specific Tracks:
- a. Tenure Track Ranks — p. 20
- b. Fixed-Term Ranks, including Teaching, Practice, and Research — p. 23
VI. Procedures for Proposing, Reviewing, and Tracking Promotions — p. 25
VII. Faculty Mentoring — p. 37
VIII. Post-Tenure Review — p. 39

Preamble

The faculty, its diversity and strength are central to the activities and accomplishments of the Gillings School of Global Public Health. The standards for appointments, promotions, and tenure are intended to acknowledge the diversity and strength of the faculty. Accordingly, this document applies to all faculty tracks and ranks, articulating the commonalities that link faculty across the many different types of appointments and activities while also addressing specific considerations for appointment and promotion within specific tracks and ranks.

I. Definitions

Appointment: The initial faculty title or rank assigned to an individual external to the School. It also applies to a person transferring from the SHRA category or from one category of EHRA appointment to another.
Promotion: Increase in rank within a given track of faculty appointment
Tenure-track: Faculty appointments that have the possibility of promotion or reappointment with tenure. Tenure-track ranks are: instructor, assistant professor, associate professor. Professor is a tenured rank. Tenure is conferred following an assessment of demonstrated accomplishment in teaching, research, and practice or service, as described in section IV, Standards and Criteria for Appointment and Promotions – General Criteria for All Tracks.
Fixed-term: Fixed-term appointments are for a specified number of years and are renewable but without tenure. Faculty in these positions may focus on teaching, research, clinical or practice/service. All faculty are, however, expected to conduct their work engaging with all three areas of practice or service, teaching, and research consistent with departmental guidelines, as described in section IV, Standards and Criteria for Appointment and Promotions – General Criteria for All Tracks.
Titles: Among the fixed-term appointments, the School supports making modifiers of titles (e.g., "Practice," "Teaching," "Research," as in "Research Associate Professor") invisible for most purposes. However, for administrative purposes, titles such as Teaching, Practice, or Research Assistant Professor are used.
Probationary term: The period of time at assistant professor or associate professor rank that faculty serve prior to promotion or tenure. Details vary for tenure and fixed-term tracks and are described below in Sections IV and V.

II. General Information on Appointments, Promotions and Tenure

A. New appointments

New appointments in the Gillings School of Global Public Health should be proposed when necessary, feasible and appropriate for the academic or research program of the department^* initiating the appointment and the School. To ensure coordination and oversight, new faculty positions, regardless of rank or track, must be approved by the Gillings Human Resources, Dean, Senior Associate Dean and/or Vice Dean after the appointment is initiated by the relevant department chair.

^* The Gillings School of Global Public Health includes seven departments and the Public Health Leadership Program. Unless otherwise specified, the word "department" is used to refer to any of these and "department chair" or "chair" are used to refer to the chairs of the seven departments and the Director of the Public Health Leadership Program.

B. Tenure track appointments, reappointments or promotions

In light of the long-term commitment that tenure entails, each recommendation that confers tenure shall be based upon consideration of the candidate's demonstrated professional performance and the current, and anticipated future needs and resources of the department, School and University. Given these considerations, tenure-track appointments should not be made in response to short-term needs or opportunities, such as to satisfy requirements for a particular project.

C. Joint appointments

Joint appointments (also known as "Secondary Appointments") can occur between departments within the School or between departments in the School and departments in other schools within the University. Joint appointments may facilitate interdisciplinary research, teaching, training, mentoring, and practice; achieve important departmental goals; and enable departments to acquire needed expertise. In the interests of broadening intellectual resources, departments may propose for joint appointments faculty whose areas of work and accomplishments are quite different from those of most in public health. Regardless, those proposed for joint appointments should be accomplished in research, teaching, and service appropriate to their own field of work and to the rank and track proposed.

The primary department is the faculty member's administrative home and has responsibility for faculty member's salary and for initiating reappointment, promotion, and tenure actions. The primary department must consult with secondary department leadership about these actions. When a joint appointment and/or promotion is proposed, the two departments should attempt to appoint and promote the individual on the same timetable, whenever possible. The primary departmental home initiates action and the secondary appointing department should specify how the candidate contributes to the secondary department teaching, research and/or service.

The percent of time that a jointly appointed faculty member may spend in the secondary department can vary, with a maximum of 50%. Also, the percent of salary paid by the secondary department can vary, from no salary coverage up to 50%, and may fluctuate depending on coverage from grants and contracts. The limit of secondary department support declines, as appropriate, in the case of joint appointments among three or more departments.

D. Departmental transfers

Departmental transfers are highly unusual. Very rarely, they may be appropriate due to changing academic needs of a faculty member or those of their primary department. A departmental transfer can occur between departments within the School or with a department located in another school. The faculty member wishing to transfer must obtain approval from the Dean of each school prior to initiating the transfer, because departmental transfers place continuing obligations on the schools, department chairs of appointing departments, and chairs of departments from which the faculty member transfers. If the academic rank of the faculty member who is transferring is associate professor or professor, required documentation is the same as for appointment at the proposed rank. If the transfer is to occur within the Gillings School, the appointment must be approved by the original and new department chairs and is then reviewed by the Gillings School's APT Committee and approved by the Dean. The Dean does not initiate departmental transfers.

E. 9- and 12-month appointments, re-appointments

Appointments at the University can be for 9 or 12 months of the year. Both are considered full-time appointments. With the exception of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, most appointments at the Gillings School are for 12 months. The review schedule for promotion is the same for 9- and 12-month appointments. Tenure track faculty appointed as Assistant Professors are evaluated at three-years for re-appointment. Tenure track faculty who are not approved for promotion or re-appointment at the end of a probationary term will be provided 12 months' notice of the end of their appointment as per the Tenure Regulations. Initially, fixed-term faculty are typically appointed for a one year period. With extended grant or other funding, fixed term faculty re-appointments may be extended for more than one year but typically not more than three years. Fixed-term faculty members on contracts longer than one year should receive at least six-months notice of non-reappointment, while those on one-year contracts should receive at least a 60-day notice of non-reappointment.

F. Track changes

Some faculty on the fixed-term track may be judged appropriate for a tenure-track appointment. They may not move directly from the fixed-term to tenure-track, but they may apply when a tenure-track search opens. Their application must be processed in the same manner as others submitted for the position, including arrangements for interviews with a search committee, and campus visits. If they are selected to make a track change (e.g. fixed term track to tenure track) as a result of a fulsom search, the chair's letter should include a description of the search by which the candidate for appointment was identified, including the focus of the search, number of candidates who applied, and number of candidates brought to campus to interview for the position as well as the robustness of the applicant pool. The initial offer letter for all candidates, including those who make a track change, should include any detailed information about "credit" toward time in rank based on previous work. The criteria and procedures detailed in the Time in Rank and Early Promotion section of this manual will apply. In rare instances, a waiver of search is approved by the Equal Opportunity and Compliance (EOC) Office for a faculty member who is pursuing a track change. Department Chairs will discuss this option if a faculty member is eligible for a search waiver.

G. Equal opportunity

It is the policy of the Gillings School of Global Public Health to enforce vigorously the University's equal opportunity procedures in both letter and spirit. Equal Opportunity & Compliance Office guidelines must be followed for all searches. Briefly, all candidates, including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, persons with disabilities and women, LGBTQ individuals and other diverse groups should have adequate opportunity to know of, apply for, and receive genuine consideration for any available position. All departments/centers/programs within the School must use the approved EEO statement for all faculty recruitments and advertisements detailed under "General Procedures for Proposing and Reviewing Promotions." Inclusive recruiting efforts should be made so that the final pool of qualified candidates reflect the diversity of the community. The search committee should be able to explain any identified obstacles in the recruiting process that affected the ability to attract diverse candidates to the position. The search committee should consider remedial action to address any identified obstacles, such as modifying the job description or expanding the recruiting area, in order to expand the pool of diverse, qualified candidates.

The University is required to collect certain demographic data (such as race/ethnicity/gender and other required demographic data of applicants) on a voluntary basis, consistent with the University's affirmative action obligations and the law. This information may be used to identify unrepresented groups in certain job areas, and is maintained confidentially consistent with applicable law.

H. Collegiality, Inclusion, Respect, and Professionalism

Faculty are expected to conduct themselves in a professional manner in all circumstances and interactions as representatives of the Department, School, and University. Gillings is committed to combatting structural racism and discrimination in society and we recognize our role in fostering a more inclusive environment on our campus and community. More specifically, faculty members are expected to follow principles of respect, civility, and acceptance that support the values and commitment to collegiality across the Gilling's community which reflects the diversity of our state and commitment to inclusive excellence established by the Gillings School. They also are expected to maintain standards of professionalism in their scholarship and relationships with faculty colleagues, students, and staff at the University and with the public both in person and/or in a professional presence online. Failure to meet these expectations will be considered in weighing qualifications for appointment, promotion, and tenure.

III. Types of Appointments

A. Tenure-Track Appointments and Ranks

1. Instructor

This rank is appropriate for persons for whom there is reasonable expectation that, in the normal course of events, they will progress to the rank of assistant professor. Appointment is for a probationary term of one year, renewable for three additional successive, one-year terms for a total of four years. No reappointment beyond four years is allowed.

2. Assistant Professor

Appointment to the rank of assistant professor or promotion to rank of assistant professor from the rank of instructor is for an initial probationary term of four years.

Upon successful completion of a review prior to the end of the third year in the first term, the assistant professor is reappointed subsequently for a second probationary term of three years.
Each department within Gillings should adopt "meet the mark" criteria that address teaching, practice/service, and scholarship – these criteria are detailed in the department-specific expectations for promotion and tenure documents. These criteria are based on standards of excellence in teaching, practice/service, and scholarship that are relevant to each department and/or discipline. Public health is necessarily interdisciplinary, and there is some variation in the expectations for promotion and tenure by discipline. Importantly, the Gillings School aims to achieve consistency in our approach/process to establishing tenure and promotion criteria as they relate to the standards of excellence within and across the discipline-specific Departments. A process of reviewing the departmental "meet the mark" criteria will be scheduled biennially by members of the Chairs committee who will review summary data on faculty promotion and tenure outcomes, changes in any departmental discipline-specific standards which call for a change in the "meet the mark" criteria, and/or changing faculty expectations at the Gillings School. It is a rare event for an assistant professor to be considered for promotion at the time of first reappointment as a probationary assistant professor. Consideration for promotion and/or tenure with a submitted dossier should not generally occur in less than four years at UNC-Chapel Hill (except for those with years of previous experience that are specifically stated in the offer letter). However, unusually high levels of accomplishment or retention concerns may be considered in the timing of an earlier promotion or tenure review.
Once a faculty member meets or exceeds the standard criteria for promotion, he/she is then eligible to be considered for promotion and/or tenure. However, some minimum time in rank is typically considered necessary for promotion and/or tenure decisions. For example, it would be highly unusual for a candidate to be in rank for less than four years; and, six years is the usual time to serve as an assistant professor. Thus, consideration for promotion should begin early in the sixth year.
Unusual, exceptional circumstances may warrant use of the seventh year in the promotion process. This is discussed under "Extension of the Tenure Clock" in the section on "Standards and Criteria for Specific Tracks."
Reappointment at the rank of assistant professor following expiration of second probationary term should be made only in clearly exceptional circumstances, and must be approved by the Department Chair, Dean and Provost.
Assistant professors are not eligible to be promoted directly to the rank of professor.

3. Associate Professor

Promotion to the rank of associate professor from the rank of assistant professor confers tenure.

Newly-recruited associate professors coming with tenure from another university should be assessed by the Dean, Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student affairs and Department Chair for whether to recommend tenure at the time of offer to UNC-Chapel Hill. The vote of the tenured professors in the home department is required for this action. In these cases, UNC-Chapel Hill will generally award tenure with the new appointment or as soon as possible thereafter if there is compelling evidence the individual meets all department, school and university expectations in terms of research, scholarship, teaching, and service. After the departmental vote, the recommendation to award tenure must be reviewed and approved by the Gillings APT Committee, the Health Sciences Advisory Committee (HSAC) Committee, the University APT, and the Board of Trustees.
Newly-recruited associate professors coming without tenure from another university or having been assistant professors at the previous university will not be extended an offer of tenure consideration at UNC-Chapel Hill at the time of the offer unless or until they clearly and compellingly demonstrate that they have already met the promotion and tenure standards of the department, school and university at UNC-Chapel Hill.
Each department within Gillings should adopt "meet the mark" criteria that are detailed in their expectations for promotion and tenure documents. Once a faculty member meets or exceeds the standard criteria for promotion, they are then eligible to be considered for promotion and/or tenure.
It is unusual for an associate professor with tenure to be considered for promotion to full professor with a submitted dossier in less than four years in rank as an associate professor. However, unusually high levels of accomplishment or retention concerns may be considered. In all cases the candidate must meet or exceed the Departmental guidelines/expectations for promotion to full professor.

4. Professor

If not already tenured at UNC, appointment to the rank of professor following all required approvals also confers tenure. Post-tenure review is then completed every five years, after tenure is awarded.

B. Fixed-Term Appointments

The following apply to all Teaching, Research, and Practice/Clinical Fixed-Term Appointments

Individuals are typically given an initial appointment of one year (for probationary purposes), which can then be renewed/reappointed for fixed-terms of 1-3 years, depending upon funding.
The individual does not have, and may not acquire, tenure by virtue of initial appointment or reappointment to a fixed-term rank.
Amount of time that an individual contributes to University-related activities may vary from part-time to full-time appointments.
Fixed-term assistant professors are not eligible to be promoted directly to the rank of professor.
Appointment or promotion to fixed-term associate professor or fixed-term professor must be reviewed and approved by the Gillings School's APT Committee. Reappointment of fixed term faculty members is reviewed/approved by the department and Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs, but does not get reviewed by the Gillings School APT Committee.
Promotion to fixed-term associate and full professor is appropriate for faculty who have substantial accomplishments and/or have rendered important service to the University, and meet all relevant guidelines and expectations established by the primary department.
General criteria are detailed below under section IV, Standards and Criteria for Appointment and Promotions – General Criteria for All Tracks, and section V, Standards and Criteria for Specific Tracks. Specific standards are set by each department's guidelines for promotion and tenure.
Length of time in rank before eligibility for promotion should generally be consistent with tenure-track expectations. Exceptions can be made based on experience before joining the Gillings School's faculty at an accredited institution, industry, government, contract research organizations or other institutions pertinent to the particular appointment and those are typically stated in the offer letter.

C. Types of Fixed-term Appointments

The types of fixed-term appointments are detailed in the following sections. Individual departments will develop their own adaptations of these categorizations, as reflected in the individual departments' guidelines for promotion and tenure. Departmental guidelines govern the assessment and evaluation for promotion of faculty within each department.

1. Teaching Appointments

This category includes: teaching instructor, teaching assistant professor, teaching associate professor, and teaching professor. Teaching faculty will be primarily engaged in teaching activities but may also serve in an administrative role, engage in public health practice, and/or conduct research.
Faculty with teaching appointments will teach courses, direct teaching or training programs, supervise student field work, advise, mentor students, and provide other important teaching/mentoring-related activities.
To be appointed to the ranks of teaching associate professor and professor, faculty members must demonstrate excellence in teaching, showing that they are fulfilling important teaching, advising, mentoring, or programmatic needs of the primary department or School.

2. Practice/Clinical Appointments

This category includes individuals with primary activity in clinical or public health practice. This category includes: practice/clinical assistant professor, practice/clinical associate professor, and practice/clinical professor. Faculty with practice/clinical appointments primarily conduct public health practice or clinical-related work, but may also serve in an administrative role, conduct research, teach courses, direct training or teaching programs, supervise student field work or provide other important teaching-related activities.
To be appointed to the rank of practice/clinical associate professor and professor, faculty members whose work primarily involves clinical, public health practice and/or policy work must demonstrate that they are fulfilling important practice/clinical needs of the department, School or communities.

3. Research Appointments

This category includes: research instructor, research assistant professor, research associate professor, and research professor. The individual will be engaged primarily in research activities, but may also serve in an administrative role, engage in public health practice, teach courses, direct training or teaching programs, supervise student field work or provide other important teaching-related activities.
In many departments, research faculty work with teams of faculty and students to write grants and/or to carry out research projects once they are funded, including providing research support to tenure track faculty. Additionally, research faculty may lead their own research programs or teams as principal investigators or in similar roles. Research faculty may also support research conducted as co-investigator on larger multi-site trials or Center grants or other team science opportunities.

4. Professor of the Practice Appointments

Faculty with professor of the practice appointments may serve in teaching, research, mentoring, practice, and advising roles appropriate to their experience and fields of interest. The professor of the practice designation is employed primarily to attract persons with distinguished careers in non-academic settings to the school for specific periods of time. Such individuals generally are successful professionals in their particular fields, and whose contributions to teaching, research or service upon joining the University community have their foundation in prior non-academic achievements.
An appointment in this fixed-term category requires prior approval from the Dean. Professor of the practice is intended to match more accurately than any existing fixed-term designations the nature and scope of the mission for outstanding senior individuals who are experts in specific areas pertinent to the broad mission of the School and from outside academia whom we may occasionally attract to campus.
Professor of the practice designations generally have an associated field identifier in the title, such as Professor of the Practice of Public Health or a specific discipline, such as Professor of the Practice of Biostatistics. In some cases, the field designator may be crafted to recognize interdisciplinary interests, such as a Professor of the Practice of Health Communications. The professor of the practice designator should be used primarily to facilitate recruitment of (and recognize) senior individuals to the School.
The individual may be given an initial appointment of one to five years and may be reappointed for fixed-terms of one to five years. Professor of the practice may not be used for individuals on the tenure-track whose basis for promotion or tenure is practice.
There are no designations as Associate Professor of the Practice or Assistant Professor of the Practice.

5. Visiting Appointments

Visiting appointments are offered to individuals of faculty rank who are at the School for temporary periods of one year, renewable for another term up to one year, with maximum allowable time of two years in a visiting capacity. In situations where further renewals are desired, appointments to one of the tenure-track ranks or non-tenure-track ranks should be considered.

6. Adjunct Appointments

This category includes: adjunct instructor, adjunct assistant professor, adjunct associate professor, and adjunct professor. Guidelines and policies that apply to adjunct appointments include the following:

The title "adjunct" connotes a part-time commitment of an individual to an appointing department.
The individual is a retired employee, employed outside the University, or has a primary appointment in a University unit different from that making the adjunct appointment.
The individual has limited responsibilities in the department making the adjunct appointment. The individual may be involved in teaching, research, practice or service activities.
The individual typically does not receive regular salary from the department making the adjunct appointment but may, in some instances, receive compensation for specific services or activities performed.
Adjunct faculty members who are unpaid may be appointed for a specific term of service or at the discretion of the chair of the appointing department or the School. If a specific term, the individual can be reappointed for fixed-terms of one to five years. (Faculty members in non-salaried appointments are not entitled to Tenure Regulation section 604 hearing rights. However, they are entitled to section 607 grievance rights found at: https://academicpersonnel.unc.edu/files/2020/02/UNC-Chapel-Hill-Tenure-Policies-and-Procedures.pdf)
The individual does not have and may not acquire tenure by virtue of initial or reappointment to the adjunct ranks.
The individual may be promoted within adjunct ranks based on appropriate criteria that relate to the individual's functions in the appointing department.

IV. Standards and Criteria for Appointment and Promotions – General Criteria for All Tracks

This section describes the standards and criteria that are common to all appointments. The weight given each of these will vary for different tracks. Further, each department and the Public Health Leadership Program will set specific guidelines for how these broad standards will apply within their own unit. These standards and criteria provide the shared, school-wide standards within which departments will develop their own specific guidelines.

To be eligible for faculty appointment in the Gillings School, individuals must have the educational training, experience, and qualifications appropriate to successfully fulfill the duties and responsibilities of their positions and the ranks for which they may be considered (e.g., DrPH, JD, MD, MHA, MPH, MSPH, PhD, ScD).

Specific criteria for tenure and fixed-term tracks are detailed in section V. Standards and Criteria for Specific Tracks.

Details of procedures for preparation of proposals for appointments and promotion are covered under section VI. Procedures for Proposing and Reviewing Promotions," below.

General

Throughout history, events and circumstances both local and worldwide have sparked important discussions about the continued legacies of discrimination, bias and inequity, which exacerbate public health problems and interfere with the mission of the school. In partnership with the UNC CH, Gillings is committed to fostering an inclusive environment on our campus and community.

Three major types of activity are at the core of our mission and therefore determine the major criteria by which appointments, promotion, and tenure are judged. As defined below, they are 1) teaching and mentoring, 2) research, and 3) practice and service. Some faculty will be primarily engaged in one or two of these. Thus, an individual whose primary responsibilities are in research may contribute to the educational mission of the Gillings School through mentoring, and contribute to practice/service or service on committees. Similarly, those whose primary responsibility is teaching may include scholarship in classroom teaching; or demonstrate service to the community or profession. How these three major areas of activity are blended in each individual's work and across the expectations of departments may vary considerably. All three types of activities (e.g., teaching and mentoring, research, and practice/service) nevertheless should be reflected in the activities of all Gillings faculty. The text below describes in greater detail the variety of forms such scholarly creation, curation, and dissemination of knowledge may take.

Teaching and mentoring – This includes dissemination of knowledge and skills to students, health professionals and the public through classroom instruction, mentoring, training, professional continuing education and other mentoring interactions.
Research – This includes original research that identifies important mechanisms or processes pertinent to health and disease, but also may include exploration of interventions to promote public health; description and analysis of public health issues, challenges, and policies; innovative strategies to improve practice; creative approaches to pedagogy; and curation and articulation of information for public health through teaching or service in government or other sectors of society that affect the public health.
Practice and Service – Practice includes the development, implementation and/or leadership of policies, programs, interventions, or other activities to benefit public health. Service overlaps with practice to include service to the department, school, university, or broader professional and other communities, such as, but not limited to, participation on committees, development of new programs, or leadership of collaborative activities.

General Characteristics of Demonstrated Impact

Specific ways in which demonstrated impact may be apparent in teaching/mentoring, research, practice, and service are detailed in the corresponding sections that follow.

Teaching and Mentoring

This faculty position requires instruction in a public university whose students reflect the diversity of our state and it requires strategies to promote or enhance student success in this environment. Scholarship of teaching occurs in a variety of ways and settings, including classrooms, training programs, and various online educational venues. It also occurs in many other settings such as in research laboratories or in field settings, practice settings, and supervising master's theses, doctoral dissertations, capstones, honors papers, other forms of student-directed research, and field training activities. Teaching also occurs as part of academic mentoring. Faculty members in the School may provide considerable continuing education for public health professionals in the form of workshops, short courses and webinars. For purposes of promotion and tenure, all of these are examples are teaching.

Demonstrated impact:

Teaching excellence is assessed through evaluation of the extent to which content is current, relevant, of high quality, and, by the effectiveness of the delivery. Innovation, adoption of course materials (e.g., books, software, web sites, blogs and other digital media, videos, games, simulations) and contributions to teaching methodology may also be assessed for demonstrated impact. Teaching approaches may be shared in the professional literature. Impact can also reflect the extent to which other faculty or health professionals adopt the teaching/training materials or approaches. Excellence in mentoring involves the number, type and quality of mentoring experiences. Mentees may have documented awards received, abstracts or manuscripts published, grants funded or successful career placements as a few examples.

Quality of teaching & mentoring:

Specific criteria for evaluating teaching are detailed in the description of the Teaching Portfolio that is the primary document employed by reviewers to assess teaching excellence. It is described in Supplemental File 5.

Research

Scholarship in research includes systematic collection, analysis, and curation of information for a) generation of knowledge, b) its refinement or application, or c) solving important public health problems. Included under scholarship are research studies which are carried out in laboratory, field, clinic, or library settings and which may be based on varied types and sources of information or data. Scholarship also includes developing innovative strategies for teaching about research and/or practice, and projects conducted in collaboration with industry, public or private organizations, or communities for the purpose of helping them assess public health problems, ensure delivery of public health services, or ensure the quality of health services or develop public health policies. At the levels of policy and government, scholarship in research may include curation and organization of knowledge and knowledge-based practices to guide improved programs and practices for prevention, health care, and well-being of the public. Scholarship in research includes high quality teaching about research methods or implications that critically integrates, translates and otherwise conveys knowledge in the subject being taught.

Collaborative and Team Science

Scholarship in many areas of public health has come to reflect multidimensional, multilevel, and intersectoral understanding of health problems and issues. Such understanding may require the scholarly contributions of multiple perspectives or disciplines. As a result, team science and collaborative research endeavors are frequent and recognized as often the best way to address complex research questions and problems. In such approaches, different scholars can each make complementary and substantive contributions.

Demonstrated Impact:

Faculty members' scholarship in research should a) contribute to knowledge that has the potential to improve the health of the public and/or b) advance the science or practice of public health. There is no single criterion or indicator of excellence in scholarship. No single element is either necessary or sufficient for promotion. Rather, the appraisal is individualized in considering the contributions of the faculty member across the many areas detailed in these guidelines. Consequently, the details that follow are intended to portray the range of desirable characteristics of scholarship.

Examples of scholarship in research:

Scholarship area is judged by others to be important relative to the faculty member's discipline and health of the public
Scholarship attributable to the faculty member represents a contribution toward moving a discipline forward, such as by stimulating the work of other scholars or new directions in field
Both (a) and (b) may be documented through independent judgement of recognized experts concerning quality and impact of scholarship
For collaborative and team science, the work of the investigator represents a major and distinct contribution toward the accomplishments of the project and its findings and moving a discipline forward
Scholarly products may take the form of peer-reviewed articles, books, other publications/presentations, patents, software, databases, and/or digital media that are peer-reviewed and represent a major contribution to the field
Invited or other distinctive presentations in major meetings in one's discipline
Substantial and innovative or integrative contributions to policy or program design
Awards received in recognition of outstanding scholarship
Recognition of outstanding scholarly accomplishments such as by election or appointment to leadership position of national and international scientific organizations or by selection as editor of scientific publications
Appointments to serve on scientific review or advisory committees which are based on scholarly accomplishments
Ability to obtain funding for research and/or scholarly activities, especially peer-reviewed funding
Innovation such as by identification of new areas or application of new methods or approaches in scholarship that addresses health of the public

Practice and Service

Impact is exemplified by service and outreach to citizens of the State of NC, the nation and the world, which thus requires the ability to represent diverse groups and to implement strategies to promote or enhance services in diverse populations.

Practice includes the development, implementation and/or leadership of policies, programs, interventions, or other activities to benefit public health. Service overlaps with practice to include service to the department, school, university, or broader professional and other communities, such as, but not limited to, participation on committees, development of new programs, or leadership of collaborative activities.

We recognize there are different types of practice and service including public health practice (e.g., service to the community) and service to the profession.

Public Health Practice

Scholarship in public health practice may be demonstrated through fulfilling important practice needs of departments or the School but may also be demonstrated through contributions beyond the university through governments or other sectors important to public health. Contributions to practice may also emerge from faculty members' articulating the public health relevance and application of their work through their research and/or teaching. Contributions may improve public health practice locally, regionally, nationally or internationally. For promotion that is fully or partially based on public health practice, innovative application of knowledge must be deemed scholarly. That is, in addition to the faculty member's practice having influenced a given policy, community, agency or program, the practice must have contributed to advancing state-of-the-art of public health practice itself. As rank increases, it is expected that the quantity, quality and impact of practice or of the implications for practice of the faculty member's scholarship will also grow.

As with research and teaching, there is no single criterion or indicator of excellence in public health practice or of the significance of practice-related scholarship. Consequently, the details that follow are intended to portray examples of the range of desirable characteristics of such work.

1. Examples of scholarship in practice

Development of new programs or policies which have had impact on health of the public
Incorporation of new developments in the faculty member's discipline and application to current public health problems.
Scholarship or other work of the faculty member moves evidence-based practice forward
For collaborations, the portion of the work attributable to the faculty member represents a major contribution to projects and to moving a discipline forward
Products of practice may take the form of patents, software, databases, and digital media, as well as programs, policies or procedures that are peer-reviewed and represent a major contribution to the field
Practice-oriented presentations with high impact as indicated by attendance or reach or key decision-makers in the audience
Participation in invited, high impact task forces or joint projects.
Documentation that practice contributions have had important effects on policy or on a community, organization, policy or program at a local, regional, national or international level
Evidence that practice activities involved or resulted in creation or development of new public health or similar systems for the improvement of the public's health
Evidence that public health practice activities have contributed to teaching activities of faculty member or department. This may include evidence that practice activities have contributed to teaching regarding such topics as assessing health problems, assuring delivery of health services, or developing health policies
Evidence that new knowledge, methods, or policies derived from the candidate's public health practice have diffused to other communities and/or health and health-related organizations.
Evidence of the impact of technical reports (e.g., letters indicating that a technical report was used to assess health problems, ensure delivery of health services, or develop health policies). Impact of technical reports should also be documented by independent reviewers
Receiving honors or awards in recognition of outstanding contributions to public health practice
Invitations by other institutions or health agencies to help plan, organize or review public health practice activities
Appointments to national commissions, committees, boards related to public health practice
Membership on or leadership of public boards, commissions, or panels where the appointment is based on the faculty member's professional expertise
Consultations with or providing technical assistance to local communities, states, nations or organizations where such consultation/technical assistance is requested because of the faculty member's professional expertise
Consultations with industry and business where such activity provides benefits for the public good
Participating in a health or environmental assessment of a community, state or nation
Designing or implementing an evaluation of a health program at a local health department
Supervision of student projects in communities and organizations where a primary result of the project is benefit to client organization
Testimony before boards, commissions or government bodies where such testimony is related directly to the faculty member's professional expertise
Preparation of studies, reports, survey or analyses which are responsive to requests from community organizations or governmental bodies and,
Acting as a resource to community organizations or governmental bodies to assist them in networking with other experts or locating information sources requested by these organizations
Speaking to and educating community organizations on public health issues
Conducting community-based research that fully engages community members and intended beneficiaries in planning, implementation and evaluation
Developing and/or implementing strategies to promote or enhance practice among members of diverse communities.

2. Innovation

Developing, testing and applying new methods or approaches in practice that address the health of the public
Improving implementation or evaluation of public health practice with new methods, tools or strategies

3. Responsiveness and collaboration

Evidence of sustaining and building relationships and teams.
Engagement in collaborative practice projects
Contributions to department's, School's or University's practice mission or national or international needs
Evidence of incorporating new developments in disciplines and transfer knowledge and techniques to current problems influencing health of the public

4. Support structures

Contribution to practice support structures of department, School and University
Advancement of practice enterprise through service on panels, mentoring and other activities or policy review panels
Leadership in design, delivery and evaluation and/or application of knowledge

Service to the Profession

All faculty members must share in work necessary to maintain operations of the department, School and University. Furthermore, faculty members are expected to contribute to growth of the School through continuous improvement efforts. Faculty members are also expected to contribute to the maintenance and growth of their profession which includes the mentoring of junior faculty.

Professional service includes, but is not limited to, service on departmental, School and University committees, leadership in professional organizations, serving as a reviewer for manuscripts, grants, white papers and reports (such as reports from the National Academy of Medicine or other prominent government or nongovernmental organizations) and review of faculty who are being considered for advancement at other institutions. Professional service may also include serving as a site visitor for accreditation visits, departmental reviews within UNC and beyond, and similar activities.

Examples of professional services activities related to the departments, School, University and profession, include:

Mentoring junior faculty
Membership on committees of departments, School, University or within the profession
Other contributions to faculty governance (e.g., conducting special studies for departments, School and University; serving on Faculty Council).
Serving in an administrative capacity for department, School, center or University (e.g., department chair, deputy chair, dean, associate dean, center director)
Membership in or leadership of a professional organization.
Reviewing manuscripts for professional journals or reports for state, municipal, federal, national and international organizations
Participation or consultation to an accreditation or other educational review board (e.g., serving on site visit teams for the Council on Education for Public Health)
Reviewing grants for federal, local or private agencies and,
Serving on advisory committees or boards for other universities, federal, national or state organizations

Invisible Labor

"Invisible Labor" for faculty members must be made evident and should be accounted for on the CV for appointments, promotions and tenure actions. "Invisible labor" refers to faculty roles that are often unseen, undocumented and not valued in advancement, promotion, tenure, and compensation decisions. For example, "invisible labor" could include: representing the department, school or university on short and long-term committees, search committees, serving on advisory groups and task forces, and unusually high student mentoring workloads. These important faculty roles often enable an institution to have diverse representation and participation in key decision-making efforts, and this service may include contributions nationally, internationally or at the department or university levels. In all cases, they should be acknowledged in the Chair's letter(s). For example, the Chair's letter(s) could make an explicit connection between the "invisible labor" and how it enabled achievement in other domains (whether this was the candidate's achievement or the achievement of other colleagues, department or university). Moreover, Chairs can continue to identify ways to make "invisible labor" visible.

COVID-19 Impact Statement

Gillings faculty are making profound adjustments to their work as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, often taking on increased and more complex workloads. Faculty members will have the option to develop a COVID Impact Statement, which can be added as an Appendix (one page maximum) to the career focus statement. The COVID Impact Statement is an opportunity for faculty to describe both positive and detrimental effects of the pandemic on the mix or balance of their work activities and the types of work outcomes that they were able to achieve. External and internal evaluators are asked to consider these impacts as they apply to departmental, school and university standards. Evaluators are also asked to recognize the individualized impact of COVID and avoid generalizing these statements. For example, the same factor that presented an opportunity for one candidate may present a hardship for another. Faculty should ensure that COVID impacts are clearly and explicitly presented on research, teaching and/or practice/service. For each responsibility that has been affected, the faculty member may summarize changes that affected productivity, including but not limited to: (i) Opportunities to demonstrate innovation and creativity; (ii) Modifications or increases to workload, activities or approaches; (iii) Canceled or delayed events, activities or work products; (iv) Reduced access to facilities, locations, personnel or partners; (v) Opportunities to address emergent issues related to the pandemic and/or (vi) "Invisible" service to sustain departmental or other operations or to support students.

Impacts should be discussed explicitly in the faculty member's career focus statement as well as in the department chair's assessments and letter. In addition, each faculty member at his/her discretion may elect to address personal circumstances that affected overall productivity (i.e., increased caregiving demands) as well as other observed effects on productivity that may fall outside of specific areas of responsibility. Adding information about personal circumstances is entirely optional.

Interdisciplinary Contributions

The School recognizes and values interdisciplinary scholarship consistent with UNC-Chapel Hill Academic Plan and University policy. It is often through interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary work that creative solutions and new knowledge emerge for many complex public health problems. For these reasons, faculty are encouraged to pursue scholarship as part of interdisciplinary team science. For interdisciplinary activities that involve collaborations, evaluation of interdisciplinary contributions in the areas of teaching, research, service and engagement should include explanation of the individual's contributions to each such activity and or scholarly product. As faculty members advance in rank, their roles in interdisciplinary ventures should progress to those of leaders and senior investigators. In all the areas of impact it is important to document any strategies that have been developed, implemented or refined to promote equitable and inclusive teaching, scholarly work, and/or service delivery to diverse or underserved populations.

V. Standards and Criteria for Specific Tracks

Tenure Track Ranks

Although patterns of contributions will vary from individual to individual, criteria for promotion include contributions in teaching and service to department, School, University, professional community and society at large, appropriate to rank.

Increase in Impact with Rank

The impact of a faculty member's scholarly and other work is expected to increase as rank increases. Expectations for each tenure-track rank are as follows. Indicators of impact and its increase with rank are detailed in guidelines of the individual departments.

a. Instructor

Persons appointed to the instructor rank should have the potential for promotion to assistant professor rank and hold either a terminal degree or be actively working toward the achievement of a terminal degree.

b. Assistant Professor

Persons may be promoted from instructor to assistant professor upon satisfactory performance in rank of instructor. Initial appointments at or promotions to rank of assistant professor should be made only for persons who show promise for promotion to higher ranks. Initial appointments for faculty at the assistant professor level are approved at the department and Dean levels.

c. Associate Professor

Appointment or promotion to associate professor should be considered only for those who have demonstrated outstanding ability and accomplishment in self-directed and independent scholarship. Assistant professors who are proposed for promotion to associate professor with tenure or those newly recommended for appointment as associate professor, should demonstrate excellence and impact in research, teaching and service. Faculty members must show how their work is pertinent to improved public health. Those being proposed for rank of associate professor must demonstrate that they are on course for national or international impact and/or distinction in their disciplines. Initial appointments for faculty with tenure are reviewed by the Gillings APT Committee, University level and approved by the BOT.

d. Professor

Appointment or promotion to the highest rank should be reserved only for those who have demonstrated sustained achievement. Candidates must have obtained national and/or international recognition of their work and demonstrated sustained, high quality accomplishment in teaching and sustained excellence in scholarship. In addition, candidates should have demonstrated sustained contributions in professional service and engaged activities. Those being proposed for promotion to professor should have demonstrated how their work has contributed to greater understanding of issues in public health, in advancement of science, or in the practice of their disciplines. Initial appointments for faculty at the Associate or Full Professor levels are reviewed by the Gillings APT Committee.

Proposed promotions may also be assessed vis-a-vis the extent to which the contributions of a faculty member under consideration are consistent with the academic and scholarly priorities and expectations of the department. In order for such priorities to be included in considerations, they must be well communicated within the department and in mentoring of faculty and clearly documented in the department's guidelines for promotion and tenure.

"Extension of the Tenure Clock" – Special Provisions for extending the minimum probationary period

For reasons of personal health, family health, childbirth, adoption, caregiving responsibilities, or other compelling circumstances, a faculty member holding a probationary term appointment at the rank of assistant professor or associate professor (without tenure) may request a pause in the tenure clock. And, during the COVID-19 global pandemic, any faculty member may request a pause to the tenure clock. In both situations, the probationary period may be extended in increments not to exceed 12 months, up to a maximum of 24 months (including any extension that may have been granted previously). This should be a joint decision between the faculty member and department chair. Any request pursuant to such an extension must be initiated no later than 24 months before the end of the term to which it is to apply and must be approved by the Provost and by the Chancellor.

When such extensions have been granted, the department chair's letter that accompanies the eventual promotion or tenure package must explain the circumstances justifying the extension.

If a decision to reappoint is made, and no promotion occurs prior to expiration of term, the assistant professor is thereupon reappointed at the rank of assistant professor without tenure.

The Timing of Review and Promotions

1. Assistant Professor, tenure track

Seven years is the usual time to serve as assistant professor, with an initial probationary appointment of four years and the reappointment review scheduled in year three.
Some faculty are appointed to the rank of assistant professor after having previously held positions at UNC or other institutions in which responsibilities are substantively equivalent to those for assistant professors although the titles of such positions may vary (e.g., "Research Associate," "Instructor"). Similarly, some may be appointed to the rank of assistant professor after several years in professional positions entailing professional experience in non-academic settings, including government or healthcare organizations in the public and private sectors. To be counted toward time in rank, the experience should be in an accredited institution, academic or otherwise.
Prior to the initial appointment and offer letter, the faculty member, department chair and Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs should review previous experience in research and teaching as it relates to tenure. Agreements about how time will be counted should be conveyed in the initial offer letter. In the case that this information is not included in the offer letter (e.g., for letters written prior to this approved APT version), the Chair and the faculty member should discuss and agree to how previous time and effort might be accounted for (e.g., at end of year meetings). If there is any uncertainty, the faculty and Chairs should seek consultation with the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs, who will obtain additional insight from the Provost's office as needed.
If prior positions are deemed equivalent, the chair's letter should clearly state that it reflects time spent performing duties that a tenure track faculty member would do at Gillings. Equivalence of such prior professional responsibilities and positions will then be assessed in the process of review of the proposed promotion. If assistant professors are hired with the expectation that time and effort at another institution will be counted, it is critical that specific discussions occur at the department level, are approved by the Senior Associate Dean, and are documented in the chair's letter.
When a faculty member meets all departmental expectations/criteria, they may be considered for promotion.

2. Associate Professor, tenure track

Newly-recruited associate professors coming with tenure from another university should be assessed by the Dean, Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs and Department Chair for whether to recommend tenure at the time of offer to UNC-Chapel Hill. The vote of the tenured professors in the home department is required for this action. In these cases, UNC-Chapel Hill will generally award tenure with the new appointment or as soon as possible thereafter if there is compelling evidence that the individual meets all department, school and university expectations in terms of research, scholarship, teaching, and service. After the departmental vote, the recommendation to award tenure must be reviewed and approved by the Gillings APT Committee, the HSAC Committee, the University APT, and the Board of Trustees.

This assessment will consider:
1. The entire body of scholarly, creative, service and educational accomplishment prior to coming to UNC-Chapel Hill.
2. Evidence that the new faculty member will contribute to the multiple missions of the school.
3. External letters from reviewers
4. In the unusual case of the associate professor arriving at Gillings with associate professor rank from another university which does not grant tenure at the associate professor level, the faculty member will be considered for tenure at UNC-Chapel Hill based upon UNC-Chapel Hill's criteria.
5. In cases where a faculty member has been approved for tenure at another university but is waiting for tenure there to become final and official, the faculty member will similarly be considered for tenure at UNC-Chapel Hill at the time of offer, as described above.
6. A faculty member who was tenured previously must undergo a full review and may or may not be awarded tenure based on whether they meet the guidelines at UNC-Chapel Hill.
7. Newly-recruited associate professors coming without tenure from another university or having been assistant professors at the previous university will not be extended an offer of tenure consideration at UNC-Chapel Hill at the time of the offer unless they clearly and compellingly demonstrate that they have already met the promotion and tenure standards of the department, school and university at UNC-Chapel Hill.
8. If it is the judgment of the Dean, Department Chair, and the department's tenured professors, that the untenured associate professor has demonstrated compelling evidence of meeting UNC-Chapel Hill's criteria for tenure in terms of scholarly and creative activity, teaching and service, they may initiate formal consideration for tenure during the initial probationary appointment. This appointment, if recommending tenure at the level of Associate Professor or higher, is reviewed by the school APT, then HSAC, and university APT.

Fixed-Term Ranks – Practice, Research and Teaching Appointments

The sections that follow provide a general description of criteria for promotion in fixed-term ranks. Each department has its own specific guidelines for assessing progress toward promotion. Unless these department/program guidelines contradict the Gillings School's criteria outlined here or the University's guidelines, those department/program guidelines shall be determinative.

Fixed-term faculty will be designated as appointed in one of the following categories, Practice/Clinical, Research, Teaching, or Professor of the Practice. Many appointed in one of Practice/Clinical, Research or Teaching will be engaged in activities also from the other two, such as a faculty member appointed in the category of Teaching but who also is active in research and clinical or public health practice. Nevertheless, as per terms of their individual appointment and consistent with departmental guidelines, an individual may be promoted on the basis of activity within one or two of these.

a. Practice/Clinical appointments

Faculty with practice appointments can serve their departments or the School through a variety of public health practice activities. To be appointed to the ranks of practice associate professor and practice professor, faculty members whose work primarily involves public health practice must demonstrate that they are meeting important needs of the department or School. Similarly, faculty with clinical appointments serve primarily in some type of clinical role.

Faculty with practice or clinical appointments may also contribute to teaching and/or research needs of the department or the School. If faculty have substantial teaching roles, high-quality teaching as outlined earlier, must be demonstrated, such as through student evaluations of courses, peer-review of teaching, and a teaching portfolio. Note that peer evaluation is not required for new appointments in practice or clinical appointments.

b. Research appointments

Criteria for appointment to research associate professor or research professor are usually different than for tenure-track faculty. To be appointed to the higher ranks, a research-track faculty member must demonstrate a consistent record of having provided important research services to his/her department or School. Such services include but are not limited to: assisting in writing grant proposals that are funded, assisting department faculty in carrying out funded research projects, assisting department faculty in producing scholarly research products such as journal articles, book chapters, software, digital media, or presentations at professional meetings, and similar products.

In some cases, research faculty members direct independent research programs; are principal investigators for research projects; involve (and support) graduate students in their projects; and produce scholarly products of their research. In such cases, criteria for quality of research sufficient to merit appointment to the higher ranks are those detailed in the Section on "Standards and Criteria for Appointments and Promotions – General Criteria for All Tracks." The quantity and quality of work should be deemed appropriate for the appointment being sought.

Faculty with research appointments may also contribute to teaching or practice needs of the department or the School. If faculty have substantial teaching roles, high-quality teaching as outlined earlier, must be demonstrated such as through student evaluations of courses, peer-review of teaching, and a teaching portfolio. Note that peer evaluation is not required for new research appointments.

c. Teaching appointments

The major criteria by which appointments and promotion are judged is the dissemination of knowledge and skills to students, health professionals and the public through excellence in teaching. For faculty to be appointed to the rank of, or reappointed at the higher rank of, teaching associate professor or teaching professor, it must be demonstrated that the candidate is fulfilling important teaching needs of departments and/or the School. Sometimes faculty with a primarily teaching appointment will conduct research as well. High-quality teaching must be demonstrated through student evaluations of courses, peer-review of teaching, and a teaching portfolio. Faculty may also be appointed and promoted on the teaching track on the basis of excellent administrative contributions within the department or School, or by developing novel or innovative curriculum, or exercising significant leadership that produces high quality scholarship in the field. Publishing on teaching is another way to distinguish scholarship in teaching. In such cases, evidence of successful program development and or enhancement may substitute for or complement other evaluation indicators for the teaching track. The chair's letter in support of promotion should clearly elucidate the scope of and evidence of accomplishment. For those faculty on teaching appointments engaged in practice, actual or potential impact of activities to enhance the public's health is also considered.

Fixed-term Professor of the Practice

Marks of distinction include their seniority in organizations in which they have served, their reputations among peers, recognition of their work, impact of their professional contributions, and their demonstrated ability to bridge academic and practice communities to assist faculty and students to translate their work more effectively into practice. Evaluation of professors of the practice is based on their contributions to the teaching, research, and outreach missions of the School. The precise mix of teaching, research, mentoring and advising, and faculty engagement activities to be pursued by a professor of the practice must be defined at the time of initial appointment and will likely differ from individual to individual. In part, evaluations may be based on evidence of continued engagement and achievement in their professions including, as well as outside, of their University responsibilities.

Faculty Workload Equity

The Department Chair, in consultation with the relevant clinical and/or administrative supervisors, should acknowledge and honor the faculty workloads that cross many areas of responsibility. Specifically, Department Chairs will examine teaching, research and administrative loads to ensure that faculty members with major professional practice, research, teaching, administrative or clinical roles, are treated fairly as compared to other tenure-track or fixed-term faculty members. Faculty workload will be discussed at the annual faculty review, described in the Chairs letter, and clarified during the review for promotion and/or tenure within the departmental, and Gillings APT committee.

VI. Procedures for Proposing, Reviewing, and Tracking Promotions

Overview

In most cases, appointments and promotions begin at the department level. Following a search, recruitment or sufficient time in rank and accomplishment, the department chair has the responsibility to work with the faculty member to assemble the necessary documents to support the requested action and send them forward to Human Resources for the Gillings School. Human Resources will then consult with the department chair and leadership of the Appointments, Promotions and Tenure Committee (APT) and the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs in readying the documents for review by APT. For tenure track appointments, the APT will make a recommendation to the Dean. If approved by the Dean, recommendations for promotion and tenure are then forwarded to the Health Sciences Advisory Committee (HSAC) on promotions and tenure and, if approved, forwarded to the university APT committee. If approved, at the university level, the Provost submits the candidate for approval and confirmation by the Board of Trustees. For fixed-term appointments, APT recommendations for appointments or promotion are forwarded to the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs for approval. If approved, fixed-term appointments are then forwarded to Human Resources and become effective on the date requested. The Gillings School encourages the use of a secure electronic medium with restricted access for the distribution of dossiers to all potential faculty voters.

Equal Opportunity

As noted at the beginning of this guide, all appointments and promotions must comply with equal opportunity rules and regulations. It is the policy of the Gillings School of Global Public Health to enforce vigorously the University's equal opportunity procedures in both letter and spirit. Details of these procedures are published in the Equal Opportunity Action Plan.

UNC-Chapel Hill Equal Employment Opportunity Statement:

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is an equal opportunity and affirmative action employer. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to age, color, disability, gender, gender expression, gender identity, genetic information, race, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, or status as a protected veteran.

All departments/centers/programs within the School must use the following approved EEO statement for all faculty recruitments and advertisements:

We expect our faculty and staff to have competency to actively contribute to fostering an academic workplace climate that is welcoming and supportive for all. At Gillings, we intend for everyone to thrive.

We strongly encourage applications from diverse individuals, including but not limited to diversity in such characteristics as race/ethnicity, color, national origin, age, gender, socioeconomic background, religion, creed, veteran's status, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation and disability.

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is an Equal Opportunity Employer.

Dossier Discussions

When possible, it is recommended that face-to-face discussions on each dossier occur at the department, and/or school level. Large departments, which may need to conduct voting by electronic means, should use a secure digital application to allow exchange of views between faculty members when face-to-face attendance at meetings is not possible. Excuse faculty members who have a significant conflict of interest (see below) from voting on a candidate for promotion and tenure. This "excuse from voting" does not become reported as an abstention.

Orienting Administrators and Faculty Members about the APT Process

The Gillings APT Chair and Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs co-sponsor an annual meeting for department chairs about appointment, promotion, and tenure policies, best practices and pitfalls. The Gillings School holds introductory sessions for faculty about APT guidelines 2-3 times per year, at faculty orientation, and will introduce brown bag lunch meetings when the new APT guidelines are approved for implementation.

Committee on Appointment, Promotion and Tenure (APT)

1. Reviews conducted by APT Committee

All appointments, reappointments and promotions that result in tenure, and all appointments to the rank of associate professor and above (including fixed-term appointments) must be reviewed by the Gillings School's APT Committee. The Human Resources staff who support the APT committee will manage and circulate among department chairs and relevant administrators a regular schedule of APT meetings along with dates by which documents are due in order to be reviewed at the next regularly scheduled meeting.

2. Representation

APT is a standing committee appointed by and advisory to the Dean, with membership from all academic departments and the Public Health Leadership Program. The Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs oversees the committee and represents the School at the Health Sciences Advisory Committee, the next-level committee to which proposed tenure track promotions are passed from health affairs schools.

3. Membership

Membership is for a period of three (3) years. The Committee will consist of representative members of faculty from each department/program at the rank of professor. At least two members of the committee should be fixed-term faculty.

4. Deliberations on colleagues from committee member's department

Members of the APT Committee may be present during discussion of a candidate who is from their own department, a department in which they have a joint appointment, and/or is someone with whom they have collaborated. They will not be assigned primary or secondary review of a candidate from their department. They can answer questions regarding the candidate or on the departmental guidelines for promotion if questions arise. They should not advocate for the candidate, but can answer questions if asked. They may participate in the APT member vote on the candidate.

5. Quorum and (potential) conflict of interest

A quorum shall consist of the majority of the eligible voting APT members for any given candidate, participating in-person, by conference call, or by email ballot after a minimum of 48 hours to review all documents relevant to a promotion, including preliminary reports prepared by other members of the APT. A conflict of interest exists when an APT member is related to a candidate who is being reviewed (e.g., spouse, partner, child, other relation). That individual should declare the relationship and not participate in voting. The individual should withdraw from the voting process and not be included as part of the vote. This does not become reported as an abstention. A potential conflict of interest may exist when an APT member has a close personal or professional relationship with a candidate (e.g., mentor, co-author, grant collaborator). In these cases, the APT member should disclose the relationship that exists with the candidate, so all APT members are notified. The APT member can be present for the presentation and discussion of the candidate, but only offers information after the discussion has been completed and if he/she is asked to contribute by an APT member. All APT members will be eligible to vote on the candidate after the review and discussion is completed.

6. Expedited timelines

When necessary, for University review/approval deadline purposes, at the request of the Dean, an expedited Appointment, Promotion and Tenure Committee review can take place.

Documentation for appointment, promotion and/or tenure

1. AP2 form

Departments must use UNC's AP2 form.

2. Letter from department chair, including the following:

Recommended appointment date. If the proposed effective date for promotion is earlier than suggested by University guidelines, a detailed justification must be given. If a faculty member is being promoted ahead of schedule because of time counted for service elsewhere, this should be explained.
For tenured/tenure-track actions: Please indicate the vote of the assembled, full professors (and associate professors, when applicable) including the number in favor, against and abstained, and any reason why there was a no vote or abstention. Report votes by rank and track in the Chair's letter to the APT and the Dean. Per university policy, the APT committee must provide the vote of the tenured full professors to the Dean, HSAC and university APT. Reason(s) for abstentions and negative votes must be addressed in the letter. The Department is encouraged to include all faculty in discussions.
For fixed-term actions: Please indicate the vote of all assembled full professors (and associate professors, when applicable) including the number in favor, against and abstained. Reason(s) for abstentions and negative votes must be addressed in the letter. The Department is encouraged to include all faculty in discussions. Part-time faculty are included in the voting body. Report votes by rank and track in the Chair's letter to the APT and the Dean. The APT committee provides the vote of the tenured full professors to the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs which is then provided to the Provost. Primary area in which the candidate's accomplishments fall (e.g., research, practice/service, teaching.) and how the applicant meets the relevant guidelines of the department in these areas is described.
For new appointments, including within the department or university, description of the search by which the candidate for appointment was identified, including the focus of the search, the number of candidates applying, and the number of candidates brought to campus to interview for the position
Evidence supporting designated area of excellence (e.g., teaching portfolio, research/scholarship career performance and plan, strategy and emphasis of candidate)
Actual (or potential) impact the faculty member's work on the health of the public
As applicable, summarize the quality of the candidate's past teaching and mentoring (may be very limited for new assistant professor appointments and for those for whom teaching is not a substantial responsibility)
Summary of individual's professional service and faculty engagement activities
Any other appropriate information about the candidate not already documented

In addition to these details, it is the responsibility of the chair to address in the chair's letter issues which may cause questions or concerns on the part of those who subsequently will review the proposed appointment or promotion. These may include, as examples, accomplishments that may appear to fall short of specific departmental guidelines, questions about possible conflict of interest for those writing external letters of support, and actual concerns raised by external letter writers. Care should be taken to ensure consistency in various parts of the letter, for example, numbers of publications, and to address any issue that may create a flag for reviewers. Letters that require additional revision after packages are reviewed by the APT Committee may slow the process.

3. Career Focus Statement

Each faculty member being recommended for promotion at the associate professor or full professor rank must include in their promotion package a career focus statement that indicates how they have had, and are likely to have, an impact on the public's health. This statement will also include a description of how the faculty member's research, teaching/mentoring and/or practice/service work exhibits competence in all of these areas as they pertain to all populations. As appropriate to the accomplishments, track and rank of the individual, this should include numbers of publications, participation on national or international panels, invited and other national presentations, major interventions directed, policy and other changes accomplished, innovations in teaching or practice, books, media, or publications utilized in teaching or training, or peer-reviewed funding obtained. This listing is not all-inclusive. The statement should also describe the faculty member's future plans for research, practice/service, or teaching, and professional service and faculty engagement, as applicable.

4. Teaching Portfolio

All tenure-track faculty members and fixed-term faculty members for whom teaching is a principal component of their responsibilities are responsible for developing and maintaining a teaching portfolio. This portfolio should be updated annually and presented at the time of promotion and/or tenure review. Details of the Teaching Portfolio are described in Supplemental File 5.

For new appointments to the tenure track or to fixed-term positions in which teaching is a principal component of responsibilities, the Teaching Portfolio should also be submitted by the candidate.

5. Peer Review of Teaching

All tenure-track faculty members and fixed-term faculty members for whom teaching is a principal component of their responsibilities should have a peer review of teaching. Along with the Teaching Portfolio, two peer evaluations of teaching completed within 24 months prior to the submission of materials should be included in the documentation. Peer evaluations should address the content, scholarly quality, and attention to practice and/or public health implications of the course being observed and the skill of the candidate in leading classes. Generally, this will be based on a discussion with the candidate, including review of the course syllabus, and a direct observation of the candidate interacting with students in class, even if done as part of online teaching. Peer review should be evaluated by an individual who is a full professor (either fixed-term or tenure track) or an already tenured associate professor.

6. Letters from Independent external reviewers

General requirements for letters from external reviewers:

The purpose of external letters is to provide an independent and unbiased assessment of the individual's national and international reputation or other qualifications for the proposed appointment. Therefore, the request from the Department chair to prospective writers of outside letters of evaluation should be phrased neutrally and should not solicit an affirmative response or recommendation. A copy of the letter that was used to solicit an evaluation of the candidate must be included in the dossier.
Letters should be from individuals:
1. outside UNC
2. who do not currently hold an adjunct appointment at UNC
3. who are not related to the candidate
4. who were not faculty at the institution in which the candidate received his/her doctorate or other terminal degree at the time the candidate was a student
5. who are independent of the candidate and not considered as having a conflict of interest. Independence and being not conflicted are interpreted as not collaborating on research grants, papers, or other projects. Given the importance however of collaboration and service on professional or national committees, and the like, judgment is required in interpretation of this criterion. The candidate and the letter writer both serving on a committee, being co-authors on a report or paper with a very large number of authors (such as a national policy statement or the report of a multi-site project), or being co-investigators in a multi-site project in which their work does not intersect may not necessarily disqualify the letter writer. In cases in which the chair is unclear as to the independence or whether there is an actual or perceived conflict of interest with a potential letter writer, consultation with the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs is advised. Chairs may want to request at least one "extra" letter in case there is a potential unanticipated conflict of interest.
Letter writers should be independent of each other. For example, they will generally not be from the same research laboratory, project, or group (except in the case of large, multi-site, multi-investigator projects). Generally, they should be from different universities although in unusual cases they may be from distinct schools or departments of the same university, but it is not preferable. As with other features of the portfolio, it is incumbent on the chair to make the case for the independence of letter writers in the chair's letter if there is basis for doubt in this regard.
All letters received by the chair, not a selected subset, must be included in the candidate's package.

Tenured Appointments

For tenured appointments or promotion to tenure, a minimum of four outside/external letters of evaluation are required and should be labelled accordingly in the packet:

Two from a list of names provided by the candidate labelled "Candidate Selection", and
Two from a list of names selected by the Department Chair labelled "Chair Selection".
All letters should come from individuals who are recognized as leaders in the field of the candidate's major work or focus. Traditionally, and ideally, letters should come from qualified individuals at other accredited academic institutions who are Full Professors*. However, we recognize that some faculty appointments and promotions are more policy or practice-focused, or teaching/mentoring-focused, or in a primarily clinical role, where external letter writers might be highly qualified experts who are non-tenured individuals, or work in government or other comparable sectors at a professional rank that is considered equivalent to Full Professor in terms of experience and expertise. The chair's letter proposing an appointment or promotion should clearly document the qualifications of external reviewers to comment knowledgeably on the qualifications of the candidate and address any questions that may emerge regarding reviewers' qualifications. Again, external letter writers must be able to speak to the qualifications of the candidate using the criteria established for promotion as described in the Gillings School and departmental criteria. *NOTE: For fixed term reviews, a letter from a highly qualified, tenured Associate Professor may be acceptable as well.

Tenure Track Appointments -- Initial

For initial tenure-track appointments, a minimum of four external letters of evaluation are required. Typically, all four are from outside UNC and are solicited from individuals at accredited institutions who can speak to research, service/practice and teaching of the proposed candidate.

Initial Tenure Track Appointments – Assistant Professor

More latitude is given in choice of external reviewers for new appointments at the assistant professor level. Since these faculty members are early in their careers, letters from collaborators and advisors are acceptable on initial appointments to Assistant Professor only, except in the case of track changes (see below). Departments may use letters of recommendation submitted as part of the individual's application as long as they fully address accomplishment and potential related to scholarship, teaching, and practice, not merely serving as character references. Importantly, in the case where a new/initial appointment to Assistant Professor is recommended via a track change (e.g., faculty member is selected and then nominated to move from a fixed term position to the tenure track), all four external letters should be free of potential conflict.

Initial Tenure Track Appointments – Associate Professor

Occasionally cases occur in which individuals have been appointed to the rank of associate professor on the tenure track without tenure awarded. In such cases, the letter from the chair, career statement, and teaching portfolio should all be updated to reflect accomplishments following the initial appointment. At the discretion of the chair and the candidate, however, some external letters in support of the initial appointment may be used to support the proposed award of tenure if they are dated within two years prior to the formal submission of the case to the APT committee. To put the strongest case forward for a tenure decision, letters that speak to the most recent teaching, research and service productivity are desirable, and must be unconflicted letters.

Initial Tenure Track Appointments – Full Professor

Letters of recommendation for appointment or promotion to the rank of Full Professor should not come from the individuals who reviewed the candidate for his/her Associate Professor promotion. To put the strongest case forward, external letters that speak to the most recent teaching, research and service productivity are most desirable.

External Letters for Fixed-term Appointments and Promotions to Assistant Professor

For appointments or promotion to fixed-term assistant professor, a minimum of two outside letters of evaluation are required:

One from a list of names provided by the candidate
One from a list of names selected by the department chair, as appropriate.
All letters should come from individuals who are recognized as leaders in the field of the candidate's major work or focus. Traditionally, and ideally, letters should come from qualified individuals at other accredited academic institutions who are Full Professors (either fixed term or tenure track)*. However, we recognize that some faculty appointments and promotions are more policy or practice-focused, or teaching/mentoring-focused, or in a primarily clinical role, where external letter writers might be highly qualified experts who are non-tenured individuals, or work in government or other comparable sectors at a professional rank that is considered equivalent to Full Professor in terms of experience and expertise. The chair's letter proposing an appointment or promotion should clearly document the qualifications of external reviewers to comment knowledgeably on the qualifications of the candidate and address any questions that may emerge regarding reviewers' qualifications. Again, external letter writers must be able to speak to the qualifications of the candidate using the criteria established for promotion as described in the Gillings School and departmental criteria. *NOTE: For fixed term reviews, a letter from a highly qualified, tenured Associate Professor may be acceptable as well.

Initial Fixed Term Track Appointments – Assistant Professor

External Letters for Fixed-term Appointments and Promotions to Associate Professor

For appointments or promotion to fixed-term associate professor, a minimum of two outside letters of evaluation are required:

One from a list of names provided by the candidate
One from a list of names selected by the department chair, as appropriate.
All letters should come from individuals who are recognized as leaders in the field of the candidate's major work or focus. Traditionally, and ideally, letters should come from qualified individuals at other accredited academic institutions who are Full Professors (either fixed term or tenure track). However, we recognize that some faculty appointments and promotions are more policy or practice-focused, or teaching/mentoring-focused, or in a primarily clinical role, where external letter writers might be highly qualified experts who are non-tenured individuals, or work in government or other comparable sectors at a professional rank that is considered equivalent to Full Professor in terms of experience and expertise. The chair's letter proposing an appointment or promotion should clearly document the qualifications of external reviewers to comment knowledgeably on the qualifications of the candidate and address any questions that may emerge regarding reviewers' qualifications. Again, external letter writers must be able to speak to the qualifications of the candidate using the criteria established for promotion as described in the Gillings School and departmental criteria.

Fixed-term Appointments for Promotion to Full Professor

For appointments or promotion to fixed-term professor, a minimum of two outside letters of evaluation are required:

One from a list of names provided by the candidate and
One from a list of names selected by the department chair, as appropriate.

All letters should come from individuals who are recognized as leaders in the field of the candidate's major work or focus. Traditionally, and ideally, letters should come from qualified individuals at other accredited academic institutions who are Full Professors (either fixed term or tenure track). However, we recognize that some faculty appointments and promotions are more policy or practice-focused, or teaching/mentoring-focused, or in a primarily clinical role, where external letter writers might be highly qualified experts who are non-tenured individuals, or work in government or other comparable sectors at a professional rank that is considered equivalent to Full Professor in terms of experience and expertise. The chair's letter proposing an appointment or promotion should clearly document the qualifications of external reviewers to comment knowledgeably on the qualifications of the candidate and address any questions that may emerge regarding reviewers' qualifications. Again, external letter writers must be able to speak to the qualifications of the candidate using the criteria established for promotion as described in the Gillings School and departmental criteria.

Letters in Support of Joint Appointments

Original external letters used for the primary appointment will generally be accepted as sufficient letters from external reviewers in the Gillings School's APT Committee's review of joint/secondary appointments. This will be the case whether the primary appointment is within the School or within another school or department at UNC. See details of review of Joint Appointments, below.

Reappointments to assistant professor for a second probationary term on the tenure track

Reappointments to assistant professor for a second probationary term of three years are reviewed by the Gillings School's APT Committee. All assistant professor reappointments on the tenure track are reviewed in the department, and at the school level APT committee, prior to being reviewed at HSAC where the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs presents the faculty member during the review process.
No external letters are required for reappointments.
The following are required for requests for reappointment to assistant professor for a second probationary term of three years.
1. AP2
2. Letter of Recommendation from chair detailing progress toward tenure
3. Full curriculum vitae (in preferred order) (See Supplemental File 3)
4. Teaching/mentoring activities: List courses for the previous three years, number of students taught by section. Give names of graduate students supervised, thesis titles, and completion dates for degree work since employment at UNC-CH. Undergraduate honors projects and/or supervision of post-doctoral fellows should be included as well.
5. Teaching evaluations
6. Career Focus Statement
Reappointment is not guaranteed. Faculty proposed for reappointment should have documented solid accomplishments in scholarship, teaching, mentoring, and service and be making good progress toward meeting departmental criteria for promotion to associate professor with tenure. Decisions about such reappointments may require consultation with the department, Senior Associate Dean, Dean, provost, and, if appropriate, legal counsel.

Reappointments for additional term(s) on the fixed-term track

Reappointments to the assistant, associate and full professor rank for individuals on the fixed-term track are made at the department level and approved by the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs. These actions are not reviewed by the Gillings School's APT Committee. No external letters are required for reappointments. Reappointment is not guaranteed. Those proposed for reappointment should have documented solid accomplishments in their area(s) of focus. Based on the departmental guidelines, the chair's letter should summarize why the individual should be reappointed, how salary is covered, and the public health impact of the candidate.

Administrative department chair appointments

1. Internal appointments

The Dean recommends each department chair appointment and reappointment to the executive vice-chancellor and provost, with review by the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs and HSAC, the university APT and approval by the Board of Trustees. They do not require APT Committee review or approval. Official notification comes from chancellor to candidates.
Appointments are typically made for a term of 5 years.

2. External appointments

Candidates who are external to the University and are recommended for new appointments as chair and professor must be reviewed and approved by the Gillings School's APT Committee, the university APT and the Provost. Professor appointments carry tenure and must meet or exceed with University and School requirements for appointments at that rank. As such, the package must include:
1. A letter of recommendation from the Dean to the Executive Vice Chancellor and the Provost. In this particular instance, the procedure differs from the process for promotion to full professor in that the letter of recommendation is prepared by the Dean (or the search committee on behalf of the Dean) rather than the current department chair. This policy distinction is a result of the administrative reporting relationship between the chair, Dean and Executive Vice-Chancellor and Provost. This process is established by the Provost's Office and is consistent across campus for administrative department chair appointments. As detailed in the description of the chairs' letters in support of promotion, above, this letter must clearly indicate the criteria upon which the candidate is being recommended for appointment.
2. How the candidate meets criteria as specified above for a full professor appointment.
3. Vote of assembled full professors (indicating the number of tenured faculty) of department in which the candidate's appointment will be held (with explanations for abstentions and negative votes) and,
4. What impact candidate's work has had or is likely to have, on health of the public.
Letters of recommendation from independent, external reviewers. On behalf of the Dean, and in consultation with search committee members and faculty from the home department, the chair of the search committee will solicit external letters from independent, impartial reviewers consistent with the description of outside letters in support of promotions on the tenure track, above.
All other documentation: Once letters of reference have been received; the departmental manager/HR Consultant will assemble all other documentation that is required for appointment to Full Professor as detailed above. The department manager/HR Consultant will then coordinate the review and voting process of the assembled full professors within the home department.

Joint appointments

Joint appointments (or "Secondary Appointments") at the rank of assistant professor, associate professor or professor are reviewed by the Gillings School's APT Committee. Departments may propose faculty for joint appointments whose areas of work and accomplishments are quite different from those of most faculty with primary appointments in public health. This may limit the pertinence of specific standards and criteria generally used in the School in evaluating proposed appointments. Nevertheless, proposals for joint appointments should document accomplishment in scholarship, teaching, and service appropriate to the candidate's field of work and to the rank and track proposed. Departments within the School may, at their discretion, add to their own departmental guidelines specific criteria for evaluation of proposed joint appointments.

Documentation required for joint appointments and promotion in the primary school and department, including letters from external reviewers, will generally be accepted for review by the APT committee of the Gillings School without requirement for additional documentation. In some cases, review of the joint appointment may take place at some time after review by the primary department. If in the judgment of the APT committee, such a delay between primary and joint appointment review compromises evaluation of the merits of the appointment, the APT committee may request updated documentation. Consequently, chairs are encouraged to be expeditious in bringing forward proposals for joint appointments.

Ideally a letter supporting the appointment or promotion for joint appointments is written at the same time and co-signed by both appointing units. In the event that timing of promotion is different for the two departments, the primary department should provide the promotion packet to Gillings, and the chair of the department in which the secondary appointment is proposed shall provide a letter with a statement of support and a report on the secondary department's APT vote to be added to the dossier. This letter should also clearly indicate which department is primary and responsible for the faculty member's salary and the percentage of time spent in each department. The letter from the chair of the secondary department need not provide all the detail of teaching, scholarly, and service accomplishments customary in letters of support for promotions and tenure. It should, however, describe in detail the accomplishments and qualifications and responsibilities of the candidate from the perspective of the value they will bring to the secondary department and the Gillings School along with the proposed role in and expectations for the candidate in the secondary department. The Gillings School APT votes on the dossier with the addition of the letter from the chair of the secondary department, and, if approving of the appointment, recommends the Dean sign a final joint appointment letter that is included in the dossier. If on the tenure track, joint appointments are also then reviewed at HSAC and the university APT Committee before being recommended to the BOT for final approval.

Processing steps

Guidelines on the Gillings School's Human Resources website provide information for use in setting due dates and compiling documents for appointments, promotions, reappointments, joint appointments and other miscellaneous actions requiring multiple level reviews. The initial process will begin with the candidate's home appointing department and ultimately will proceed through the APT Committee.

Appeals

The procedure through which a faculty member may appeal a decision not to reappoint her/him is specified in Section 4, "Non-reappointment of Tenure Track Faculty Members" within the Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure in the UNC at Chapel Hill.

Reporting of School-Level Tenure Denials to the University

All tenure denials at the department level should be included in the Chair report to the Dean on an annual basis in the end of year report. All tenure denials at the Gillings school level will be documented by HR, and tallied by the school for an annual report to the Provost. In addition, the school will annually submit the names of faculty members who: (1) switched from the tenure-track to the fixed-term track, (2) left the institution during the probationary term, (3) were not re-appointed, or (4) were denied a second probationary term as Assistant Professor.

VII. Faculty Mentoring

Mentoring is a fundamental activity within the School and University and is intended to help and support faculty members as they develop their careers. Primary mentoring of a faculty member should occur in his or her department.

A. Expectations of mentoring processes are as follows:

1. Orientation

A School-wide orientation to SPH and UNC resources, such as those for research, APT processes, communication, fundraising and academic programs, is organized each year for new faculty members by the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs and Human Resources Department.

2. Establishing a mentoring system

Department chairs are responsible for supporting and mentoring faculty members and ensuring that a departmental mentoring program exists. All assistant professors should have one or more formal mentors. Chairs should discuss with each faculty member who is best suited to serve as their mentor(s). Department Chairs should develop a mechanism for mentee evaluation of mentors.

3. Department-specific approaches

Different departments have different approaches to mentoring (e.g., assignment vs. self-selection). Mentoring requirements for assistant and associate professors are determined by department chairs and tailored to the needs of individual faculty members but should be explicit.

4. Yearly review of faculty members

Yearly faculty reviews should clearly document progress toward promotion. This should be conducted by the chair (or the chair's designee) in procedures developed within each department. Yearly review should include full disclosure in writing and shared with the faculty member of any concerns about their likelihood of successful promotion, along with specific recommendations regarding remediation.

5. Annual status report to the Dean

Chairs will provide a status report on each assistant and associate professor in their departments at their annual review meetings with the Dean.

6. Faculty member meeting with chair at least 18 months prior to promotion

At least 18 months prior to review for promotion from assistant professor to associate professor and from associate professor to full professor, the department chair should meet with the faculty member (alone or in addition to other faculty mentor(s).

The faculty member should be given an individualized schedule indicating steps and materials expected for promotion and respective due dates and sources of information for use in assembling materials. This includes due dates for:
1. Potential names for external review letters;
2. Faculty member's CV;
3. Career focus statement;
4. Teaching portfolio (including department peer teaching review); and
5. Examples of scholarly products.
The department chair and departmental staff should work with the HR Team Lead to assist faculty members in preparing for promotion process.
The department chair should reinforce with faculty members the importance of becoming familiar with policies and procedures included in this APT Manual and the university APT Manual.

7. Pre-review of faculty members' dossiers by the chair of the APT Committee and Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs

Before advancing a promotion package, after review by the HR Consultant to the Department, the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs and chair of APT Committee review the promotion package and inform the department chair if they anticipate any problems with the promotion process. If at all possible, resolution of such issues should occur prior to advancing the candidate's promotion package to the APT Committee for its review and vote.

VIII. Post-Tenure Review

A. Statement of Purpose

The purpose of post-tenure review at UNC-Chapel Hill and the Gillings School of Global Public Health is to contribute to achieving the department, School and University missions of educational excellence. The review process for all faculty members having tenure should assist them in their ongoing professional development, including efforts to enhance their skills as teachers, their accomplishments as scholars, and their contributions to the profession and the public. Should performance deficiencies be found, the process should constructively and specifically address these issues to aid the faculty member in re-establishing performance that meets or exceeds departmental expectations.

B. General Policy

The SPH policy and processes conform to the Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill subsequent revisions of this document.

Accordingly, each tenured faculty member must be reviewed at least once every five years following conferral of tenure. More frequent review may occur at the discretion of department chairs. Review must examine all aspects of faculty activities and performance.

Criteria for evaluation will be determined by each department, but must conform to those documented in this manual. The review process must involve faculty peers and be conducted by at least three persons who constitute the Post-Tenure Review (PTR) Committee. Comprehensive evaluations conducted for other purposes, such as promotion or reappointment, may be substituted for or combined with post-tenure review. Under very unusual cases, a review may be delayed for compelling reasons approved by the Dean and Provost.

Senior leaders, such as dean and chairs, are reviewed every five years. This review constitutes post-tenure review for those positions.

C. Expectations of Faculty Members

All faculty members are expected throughout their careers to maintain standards of excellence, scholarship and integrity in teaching, research, practice and service (professional and faculty engagement) as stated in the criteria for tenure and promotion detailed above.

Those who have advanced to the rank of professor may contribute to the Gillings School's and University's missions of educational excellence in varied roles, such as serving as a dean, associate dean, department chair, center director, or a leader in engaged scholarship (e.g., through high-level positions in public health-related agencies, institutions, or professional organizations). Such contributions are a noteworthy reflection of academic impact. Accordingly, time and energy spent in these commitments should be considered in assessments of faculty success. Departmental expectations will be developed by individual departments but should reflect that the standards for post-tenure review of senior faculty are not simply duplicative of those for promotion to full professor.

D. Post-tenure Review Procedure

1. Cycle of review, notice and participation

All faculty members who are to undergo review will be advised by department chairs of such reviews at least six (6) months in advance.
All faculty members who are to undergo review in a given year will take active roles in the post-tenure review process by assisting with planning, preparing relevant background information, engaging in constructive dialogues with colleagues and the department chair and participating in creation of a development plan, if needed, to address deficiencies in performance.

2. Composition of Post-Tenure Review committees

Department chairs shall convene either an ad-hoc committee each year or a standing committee, called the "Post-Tenure Review (PTR) committee." The PTR committee must include at least three tenured faculty members to oversee post-tenure reviews. There is no requirement that they all be from the faculty member's department; although it is typical that they are from the same department.
The Dean's office and HR manage the chairs' reviews. The Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs receives a summary of the PTR documents prior to it being sent for HSAC review.

3. Information considered during PTR review process

The PTR review process will be conducted in a way that provides the department chair and members of the PTR committee relevant information concerning the faculty member's accomplishments and plans in teaching, research, practice and service (professional and faculty engagement) in relation to the missions of the department, School, and University, at least over the last five years.
Faculty members must provide the PTR committee:
1. Curriculum vitae
2. Current funding support for research and scholarly activity
3. Five-year career statement/plan
4. Teaching statement (maximum of 3 pages) and student course evaluations from previous three years
5. The department chair may also provide the PTR committee with additional information that may be pertinent, including information developed during periodic merit reviews and information relating to the faculty member's ongoing work within the department, School or profession.
6. A description of how the faculty member's research, teaching/mentoring and/or practice/service work has contributed to the mission of the Gillings or the larger University.

4. Consultation between faculty members being reviewed, PTR committees and department chairs

As appropriate, faculty members being reviewed may meet with the PTR committees and department chairs to discuss teaching, scholarship, service and other accomplishments.
The PTR committee will do the following:
1. Use all evidence provided by the faculty member being reviewed and the department chair in evaluating performance, as outlined in the three preceding sections: 1. Cycle of review; 2. Composition of PTR committee; 3. Information considered.
2. Provide a written summary (to be provided to the faculty member and department chair) with assessment of overall performance and specific performance in pertinent categories of scholarship, teaching and mentoring, practice, service and engagement, and clearly specify if the faculty member meets, exceeds or does not meet expectations (see Supplemental File 10). This summary should also include any recommendations for improvement and describe any substantial deficiencies in performance that should be addressed and articulated in a development plan.
Faculty members being reviewed must be permitted to provide written responses to committee reports. Based on such responses, the department chair may ask the committee to reexamine its recommendations.
The department chair will review the PTR committee's report, the faculty member's response, if any, and applicable materials and provide her/his written review which is submitted to the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs, who shall review the information provided prior to submitting it to the Dean.

5. Recognition of outstanding performance

When faculty members being reviewed are considered outstanding (e.g., "exceeding expectations") in overall performance, department chairs should use this as an opportunity to recognize them for example by recommending that the individual is nominated for awards, distinguished professorships, etc.

6. Disposition of reports

These PTR materials (and a development plan when necessary) will be reviewed by the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs and Dean. If a development plan is required, the chair will document what it is, work with the faculty member to design the development plan, implement it and establish accountability benchmarks.
All final PTR reports, as well as quarterly and annual updates on development plans, are filed with HR and the Provost Office.
The Dean and Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs, will review PTR reports, updates on development plans, and the Dean gives final approval on the annual PTR report sent to the Provost's Office.

7. Establishment and monitoring of development plan

For faculty members whose overall performance does not meet expectations, the report of the PTR committee shall include a statement of the faculty member's primary responsibilities, specific descriptions of where performance does not meet expectations on teaching, research or service as they relate to the faculty member's assigned duties. In consultation with the faculty member, the Chair develops specific, measurable objectives for improvement.
Faculty development plans are individualized to address areas where expectations are not met, taking into account the faculty member's intellectual interests, abilities and career stage, and department needs.
The faculty development plan should describe changes, if any, to be made in the faculty member's teaching, research, or service responsibilities. The development plan should include: 1) measurable objectives/milestones and specify steps designed to achieve those objectives; 2) indicators of whether (or not) objectives have been attained; 3) a clear time frame for the completion of the objectives; 4) resources available to assist the faculty member in achieving the objectives; and, 5) clarification of consequences of failure to meet stated objectives. Faculty members with a development plan should report on progress toward meeting stated objectives to the Department Chair on a quarterly basis, and annual progress reports on the plan are shared with the HR Team Lead, Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs, and the Dean.
Sometimes it is helpful to have peer support to achieve objectives in the development plan. Department Chair and faculty member should discuss whether a faculty member might benefit from peer mentoring/support.
Progress meetings between the faculty member with a development plan and the Department Chair must occur quarterly during the specified time frame. The Chair will provide a quarterly report that summarizes faculty progress made (or not made) on the development plan at least annually until all objectives are accomplished. The Chair's quarterly report is to be submitted to HR within two weeks after the quarterly meeting with the faculty member and is to be reviewed by the Dean and the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs. A report that summarizes the progress over a year (e.g., all quarterly reports) is to be filed annually in the Provost Office that documents faculty who have a development plan, with review by the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs and final sign-off by the Dean.
If and when the faculty member has met the objectives specified in the development plan, the department chair shall acknowledge in writing a faculty member's successful completion of objectives in the development plan and forward that document to the Dean and the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs. This information will be updated in the annual report sent to the Provost Office.
In the event that insufficient progress on objectives or other substantial deficiencies in performance continue at the end of one-year, the department chair will notify the faculty member in writing, detailing the nature of continued deficiency. It is expected that communications between the chair and faculty member will have been ongoing, and that the Dean has been informed (having reviewed quarterly reports) if there is a lack of progress. Generally, discussions about a lack of progress also involve consultation with other appropriate campus offices. Although these situations are rare, all parties involved proceed with extreme care and clear communication.
In the event that a faculty member fails to successfully complete a development plan, and performance continues to be deficient despite regular communication that includes the faculty member, Department Chair and Dean, in collaboration with the Provost or his/her representative, this group will consider whether there are grounds for dismissal or other disciplinary action under the Trustees Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure. Dismissal or severe sanctions may be imposed only in accordance with and on the grounds stated in the Trustees Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure.
Faculty members may grieve matters related to post-tenure review to the Faculty Grievance Committee under Section 607 of the Code of the University of North Carolina during their term of employment.

8. Record keeping

PTR expectations are established within departments and filed with HR after an initial review by Senior Associate Dean and approval by Dean.
Department chairs will maintain a list of faculty members reviewed each year, a record of completed reviews, and any faculty responses to reviews. The names of the faculty members for whom development plans are recommended, a copy of the development plans and all related quarterly reports will remain on file in Human Resources, as well.

9. Procedure for requesting a delay of the Post-Tenure Review

Requests to delay an upcoming post-tenure review should be submitted to the faculty member's department chair at least 12 months in advance to ensure timely departmental processing of the request*. *Note: COVID-Impact requests for delay will be processed more quickly so that the 12 months in advance period will be waived.
Requests must be in writing and specify the compelling reason(s) for the request to delay the review.
Requests must then be conveyed with written justification from the department chair to the Dean and the Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs whose approval shall be required for the request to be considered further.
Requests approved by the Dean are then submitted to the Executive Vice Provost for review and approval. Once the request is reviewed, a written communication will be sent from the Provost's Office to the faculty member, the department chair and the Dean indicating whether the request has been approved.
If the request is approved, an action must be submitted with the Provost's Office letter attached, to finalize the change to the Post-Tenure Review date.

E. Reports and Appeals to the Dean

1. Annual reports

Human Resources at the SPH will provide a yearly report to the Dean, Vice Dean and Senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs, that lists all faculty members reviewed during the prior academic year, including outcomes for each individual.

2. Appeals for findings of substantial deficiencies/not meeting expectations and development plans

Faculty members found by departmental post-tenure review committees and department chairs to not meet expectations and for whom development plans are established may appeal the findings of substantial deficiency or the terms of the development plan within 30 days of receiving the final letter from the department chair, including such findings.
Such appeals are to be made to the Dean, who may consult with University Counsel and the Provost's Office. Following any such consultation, the decision of the Dean shall be final.

F. Records and Confidentiality

1. Maintenance of written records

Department chairs will maintain each post-tenure review committee's review summary, and the response, if any, by the faculty member being reviewed as part of that faculty member's confidential personnel file, along with all background information, other materials used in connection with the review, a development plan, if required, and all quarterly progress reports associated with the development plan. A copy of the development plan should also be on file in HR.

2. Obligation of confidentiality

All matters relating to post-tenure reviews are confidential.
All those who participate as members of PTR committees or who otherwise advise on individual cases should be advised of their obligations to abide by this requirement of confidentiality.

IX. List of Supplemental Files

Definitions and faculty recruitment requirements
Contents of Promotion Package
1. Contents of appointment or promotion package for tenure-track positions
2. Contents of appointment or promotion package for fixed-term positions
Appointments, Promotion and Tenure Committee Checklist
Examples of letters to solicit external review of faculty members for:
1. Tenure-track faculty member
2. Fixed-term (teaching/clinical-track position)
3. Fixed-term (research-track position)
Teaching Portfolio
Extension of the Tenure Clock: Special Provisions for Extending the Maximum Probationary Period
1. Appeal for Extension of the Tenure-Clock form
How to present and effective promotion/tenure dossier
Gillings School of Global Public Health Post-Tenure Review form
Table for External Reference Letters

Related Requirements

External Regulations

UNC Policy Manual 400.3.3, Performance Review of Tenured Faculty (Post-Tenure Review)
UNC-Chapel Hill, Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
UNC-Chapel Hill, The Faculty Code of University Government
UNC-Chapel Hill, Faculty Handbook: Appointment, Promotion & Tenure Guidelines
UNC-Chapel Hill, Post-Tenure Review Policy
UNC Chapel Hill, Academic Personnel - Dossier: Format for Tenure Track or Tenured Faculty Review
UNC Chapel Hill, Academic Personnel - Less than Full-Time Work Schedules

Contact Information

Primary Contact

Name: Mark Holmes, Senior Associate Dean for Faculty and Staff Affairs

Email: mark_holmes@unc.edu

Details

Article ID: 160670

Created

Wed 3/4/26 4:38 PM

Modified

Tue 8/11/26 1:51 PM

Responsible Unit

School, Department, or other organizational unit issuing this document.

Gillings School of Global Public Health

Issuing Officer

Name of the document Issuing Officer. This is the individual whose organizational authority covers the policy scope and who is primarily responsible for the policy.

George Holmes

Issuing Officer Title

Title of the person who is primarily responsible for issuing this policy.

Senior Associate Dean for Faculty and Staff Affairs

Policy Contact

Person who handles document management. Best person to contact for information about this policy. In many cases this is not the Issuing Officer. It may be the Policy Liaison, or another staff member.

George Holmes

Next Review

Date on which the next document review is due.

08/01/2026 12:00 AM

Effective Date

If the date on which this document became/becomes enforceable differs from the Origination or Last Revision, this attribute reflects the date on which it is/was enforcable.

06/01/2023 12:00 AM

Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level

15.4

Gillings School of Global Public Health: Appointment, Promotions and Tenure Manual

Summary

Body

Title

Introduction

Purpose

Scope

Policy

Table of Contents

Preamble

I. Definitions

II. General Information on Appointments, Promotions and Tenure

A. New appointments

B. Tenure track appointments, reappointments or promotions

C. Joint appointments

D. Departmental transfers

E. 9- and 12-month appointments, re-appointments

F. Track changes

G. Equal opportunity

H. Collegiality, Inclusion, Respect, and Professionalism

III. Types of Appointments

A. Tenure-Track Appointments and Ranks

1. Instructor

2. Assistant Professor

3. Associate Professor

4. Professor

B. Fixed-Term Appointments

C. Types of Fixed-term Appointments

1. Teaching Appointments

2. Practice/Clinical Appointments

3. Research Appointments

4. Professor of the Practice Appointments

5. Visiting Appointments

6. Adjunct Appointments

IV. Standards and Criteria for Appointment and Promotions – General Criteria for All Tracks

General

General Characteristics of Demonstrated Impact

Teaching and Mentoring

Research

Collaborative and Team Science

Practice and Service

Public Health Practice

Service to the Profession

Invisible Labor

COVID-19 Impact Statement

Interdisciplinary Contributions

V. Standards and Criteria for Specific Tracks

Tenure Track Ranks

Increase in Impact with Rank

a. Instructor

b. Assistant Professor

c. Associate Professor

d. Professor

"Extension of the Tenure Clock" – Special Provisions for extending the minimum probationary period

The Timing of Review and Promotions

1. Assistant Professor, tenure track

2. Associate Professor, tenure track

Fixed-Term Ranks – Practice, Research and Teaching Appointments

a. Practice/Clinical appointments

b. Research appointments

c. Teaching appointments

Fixed-term Professor of the Practice

Faculty Workload Equity

VI. Procedures for Proposing, Reviewing, and Tracking Promotions

Overview

Equal Opportunity

Dossier Discussions

Orienting Administrators and Faculty Members about the APT Process

Committee on Appointment, Promotion and Tenure (APT)

1. Reviews conducted by APT Committee

2. Representation

3. Membership

4. Deliberations on colleagues from committee member's department

5. Quorum and (potential) conflict of interest

6. Expedited timelines

Documentation for appointment, promotion and/or tenure

1. AP2 form

2. Letter from department chair, including the following:

3. Career Focus Statement

4. Teaching Portfolio