PPM Logo

230 - Personnel-Academic

Section: 230-278
Effective: 07/01/2017
Supersedes: N/A New
Review: 07/01/2020
Issuance Date: 10/04/2017
Issuing Office: Academic Personnel Services

PPM 230-278 Policy [pdf format]
PPM 230-278 Appendix A [pdf format]

APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION - HEALTH SCIENCES CLINICAL PROFESSOR SERIES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PPM 230-278-4 Definition

PPM 230-278-4. a

Faculty in the Health Sciences Clinical Professor series are salaried appointees in the health sciences who teach, participate in patient care, and also participate in University and/or public service and scholarly and/or creative activities.

 

Faculty in the Health Sciences Clinical Professor series teach the application of basic sciences and the mastery of clinical procedures in all areas concerned with the care of patients, including dentistry, medicine, nursing, optometry, pharmacy, psychology, veterinary medicine, the allied health professions, and other patient care professions.

 

The Health Sciences Clinical Professor series is separate from the volunteer Clinical Professor series, which is governed by APM - 279.

 

For more information on this series, please see PPM 230-278, Appendix A, Guidelines for the Health Sciences Clinical Professor Series.

 

APM 278-4. b

APM 278-4. c

APM 278-4. d

 

PPM 230-278-8 Types of Appointment

APM 278-8

 

PPM 230-278-10 Criteria

A candidate in this series shall be evaluated using the criteria specified below. The criteria shall be appropriately weighted to take into account this series’ primary emphasis on direct patient care services and clinical teaching. See APM - 210-6 and PPM 230-278, Appendix A, Guidelines for the Health Sciences Clinical Professor Series.

 

The criteria are:

 

a.     Professional competence and activity

b.    Teaching

c.     University and public service

  1. Scholarly and creative work      

 

The departmental recommendation letter must provide a description of the proposed allocation of the candidate’s time among the areas of activity. Candidates with part-time appointments are expected to demonstrate the same quality of performance as full-time appointees, but the amount of activity may be less.

 

These criteria and standards are set forth in APM - 210-6, Instructions to Review Committees Which Advise on Actions Concerning the Health Sciences Clinical Professor Series and PPM 230-278, Appendix A, Guidelines for the Health Sciences Clinical Professor Series.

 

PPM 230-278-16 Restrictions


APM 278-16

 

PPM 230-278-17 Terms of Service

APM 278-17

 

PPM 230-278-18 Salary


APM 278-18

 

PPM 230-278-20 Conditions of Employment

 

APM 278-20. a

APM 278-20. b

 

PPM 230-278-20. c

 

Faculty in this series must have a doctorate in a clinical discipline. Unless not required for the position, appointees in the Health Sciences Clinical Professor series must possess and maintain an appropriate valid license and active membership as a Medical Staff member, or equivalent. Loss of license or active Medical Staff privileges will result in, at department discretion, reassignment of duties or termination of appointment for cause under APM - 150.

 

APM 278-20. d

APM 278-20. e

APM 278-20. f

APM 278-20. g

APM 278-20. h

APM 278-20. i

APM 278-20. j

 

PPM 230-278-24 Authority

 

No appointment, reappointment or academic review action is final until there has been an academic review and the individual with final authority has approved the action.

 

The UC San Diego Authority and Review Chart sets forth the individual(s) and/or committees responsible for review, as well as the final authority for approval.

 

PPM 230-278-80 Review Procedures

 

Procedural guidelines are available in the Academic Personnel Services Procedure Manual.

 

PPM 230-278-82 Procedures for Appointment, Reappointment and Non-Reappointment to the Rank of Assistant Health Sciences Clinical Professor

 

The general rules of APM 278-80 apply here. In addition:

 

  1. Reappointment/Merit Review

 

When a non-Senate appointee is scheduled for reappointment/merit review, the department should first determine whether reappointment is warranted. If the department does not wish to reappoint, then in accordance with APM 137, Non-Senate Appointees/Term Appointment, the appointment will expire on the established ending date.

 

If reappointment is warranted, the department must prepare a reappointment/merit review file with one of the following recommendations:

 

  1. Reappointment with Merit Advancement
    If an appointee’s performance is satisfactory, the department may recommend a two-year reappointment with merit advancement.

  2. Reappointment without Merit Advancement
    If an appointee’s performance does not justify merit advancement, the department may recommend a two-year reappointment with no merit advancement.
     
  1. Final Reappointment/Merit Review
     
    The third reappointment/merit review of an assistant-rank appointee normally occurs in the sixth year of appointment. Absent an extension of the probationary period or a prior deferral of an academic review, an appointee’s third merit/reappointment review is the appointee’s final merit/reappointment review at the assistant rank.

    Three outcomes are possible in the final merit/reappointment review of an Assistant Health Sciences Clinical Professor, and the eligible faculty must vote on the proposed action.

 

1.     Promotion is Recommended

If the department is convinced that an appointee’s record meets or exceeds the University’s expectations for promotion, the department may vote to recommend promotion to the Associate or Full level, effective the following July 1. 

2.     Postponement of Promotion Review is Recommended

If the department believes there is significant work in progress that cannot be completed in time to justify promotion, but which should be completed prior to the promotion review and, when completed, would likely suffice for promotion, the department may propose postponement of the promotion review.

The department must demonstrate that the appointee’s academic record is strong and that he or she is making active and timely progress on substantial work that:

•           should be completed prior to the promotion review (the anticipated completion date must
            be indicated); and

•           would likely suffice for promotion.

If the department proposes postponement of the promotion review, a reappointment file (recommending a two-year reappointment with or without merit advancement) must be submitted in accordance with the campus deadline for submission of reappointment and merit advancement files.

3.     Non-reappointment

If the department believes that an appointee’s overall career achievements do not justify promotion, and that a postponement of the promotion review is not warranted, no promotion file is prepared and the appointee will not be reappointed. In accordance with APM 137, Non-Senate Appointees/Term Appointment, the appointment will expire on the established ending date. In cases of non-reappointment, the department chair should consult with the dean.

 

If promotion is proposed and denied, or if the department does not propose promotion and/or reappointment, in accordance with APM 137, Non-Senate Appointees/Term Appointment, the appointment will expire on the established ending date.

4.     Notice of Non-reappointment

Although notice of non-reappointment is not normally required, the department should provide written notice of non-reappointment whenever possible.


PPM 230-278-83 Procedures for the Formal Appraisal of an Assistant Health Sciences Clinical Professor Who May Be a Candidate for Promotion

 

An assistant-rank appointee in the Adjunct Professor, Health Sciences Clinical Professor, or Professional Research (Research Scientist) series must receive an appraisal, which is a formal evaluation of his or her achievements and progress toward promotion. The appraisal also identifies appointees whose records of performance and achievement are below the level of excellence expected for academic appointees.

 

Departments may conduct appraisals for appointees in other non-Senate series if the department believes such an assessment would be valuable to the department and/or appointee.

 

The general rules of APM 220-80 apply here. In addition:

a.     The appraisal is conducted in an appointee’s fourth year of service at the Assistant rank (and is combined with the second reappointment/merit review), except when an extension of the probationary period has been granted. If the appraisal is not combined with a reappointment/merit review, the appraisal must be presented in a separate academic review file.

No formal appraisal is required if, prior to the normal occurrence of an appraisal, the Assistant Professor is being recommended for promotion to take effect within a year, has given written notice of resignation, or has been given written notice of non-reappointment.

b.    The following factors should be evaluated, if appropriate for the series when conducting an appraisal:

·         Published research and other completed creative activity, and potential for continued            research and creative activity

·         teaching effectiveness at the undergraduate and graduate levels

·         Departmental, University and community service contributions

·         Expertise and achievement in clinical activities, if applicable

·         An appointee’s self-evaluation (if any)

c.     Appraisal Vote

 

An appraisal vote is not required for non-Senate appointees; however, departments and/or divisions may choose to establish voting procedures for non-Senate appraisals.

 

A department may form a departmental ad hoc committee in order to assess the appointee’s achievements and activities.

 

The departmental recommendation letter should discuss the nature and extent of department consultation on the appraisal, as well as the result of a vote, if taken.

 

If, as a result of the appraisal process, the department wishes to recommend promotion to the Associate or Full rank, the department must conduct a promotion review and solicit letters from external referees.

 


PPM 230-278, Appendix A

 

GUIDELINES FOR THE HEALTH SCIENCES CLINICAL PROFESSOR SERIES

 

These guidelines are intended to provide additional, detailed information on the Health Sciences Clinical Professor series at UC San Diego to assist in the evaluation of the appropriateness of appointment to and advancement within this series.

 

The guidelines also are intended to provide information on the distinctions between this series and the Professor of Clinical X series.

 

It should be noted that the diversity of talents and accomplishments required in the Health Sciences Clinical Professor Series are such that the criteria for appointment and advancement must be applied with some degree of flexibility. These guidelines create a better understanding of the series at UC San Diego and the flexible application of the series criteria.

 

  Criteria and Methods of Evaluation for Appointment and Advancement

 

The four criteria for appointment and advancement in the Professor (Ladder-Rank) series at UC San Diego are:

 

1.                    Performance in teaching

2.                    Scholarly and creative accomplishments

3.                    Professional (clinical) competence and activity (patient care)

4.                    University and public service

 

However, the combined demands of teaching, research, patient care and community service are such that it is unrealistic to expect that all faculty members in a clinical department can excel in each of these endeavors.

 

Faculty in the Health Sciences Clinical Professor series are appointed for the primary purpose of filling roles in patient care services and in the clinical teaching programs. These functions should be identified and documented by the department in preparing the candidate's file for review.

 

The criteria and the frequency of review in judging candidates for appointment or advancement in this series are the same as those specified for the Professor (Ladder-Rank) series, except that each of the criteria must be appropriately weighted to take into account the primary emphasis on direct patient care services and clinical teaching activities.

 

Documentation should be compiled as for other academic series, including documentation of teaching and clinical performance as described in the Professor of Clinical X series criteria.

 

The Health Sciences Clinical Professor series should not be regarded as an escape or contingency appointment for faculty in other series who fail to receive promotion.

 

Professional competence and activity generally focus on the quality of patient care. A doctoral degree in a clinical discipline, as well as a demonstrated distinction in the special competencies appropriate to the field and its characteristic activities, is a criterion for appointment. The candidate should also demonstrate evidence of achievement, leadership, or progress in the development or utilization of new approaches and techniques for the solution of professional problems.

 

Although it need not be as extensive as that required for the other professorial series (e.g., Clinical X), some evidence of scholarly or creative activity appropriate to the clinical discipline, as determined by the individual department, is expected in this series at UC San Diego. Scholarly activities such as participation in collaborative research, publications in the medical literature (e.g., case reports, book chapters, reviews, letters to the editor), published articles for the lay population (e.g., newsletters, newspapers, magazines) presentations at scholarly meetings or continuing education courses are desirable and should be encouraged. Development of innovative clinical procedures, teaching methods, new courses, clinical guidelines, and instructional materials for teaching patients should also be recognized as creative accomplishment.

 

        Health Sciences Assistant Clinical Professor:

 

For an initial appointment to the Health Sciences Assistant Clinical Professor rank, the departmental recommendation letter should describe the candidate’s present position and the likelihood that the candidate will be a competent teacher and develop an excellent professional practice.

 

For appointment as Health Sciences Assistant Clinical Professor, Step I or II, the candidate should:

 

1.        have high-quality postgraduate clinical training providing eligibility for one of the medical specialty boards (a minimum of three years Post M.D.) or equivalent achievement and recognition.

 

2.        demonstrate teaching ability or have clear potential as a clinical teacher; and

 

3.        demonstrate clinical ability of high quality commensurate with his or her experience in a branch of medicine.

 

For appointment at a Step III or above, the candidate must also:

 

4.        be board eligible in the specialty appropriate to the clinical care and teaching activities, or have appropriate equivalent recognition;

 

5.        demonstrate ability as a clinical teacher; and

 

6.        demonstrate continuing achievement in clinical care and teaching.

 

        Health Sciences Associate Clinical Professor:

 

In addition to proven competence in teaching, a candidate for appointment to the rank of Health Sciences Associate Clinical Professor should demonstrate evidence of excellence in professional practice. Such evidence may include, but is not limited to, evaluations that demonstrate:

 

     provision of high-quality patient care;

 

     a high level of competence in a clinical specialty;

 

     expanded breadth of clinical responsibilities;

 

     significant participation in the activities of clinical and/or professional groups;

 

     effective development, expansion, or administration of a clinical service;

 

     recognition or certification by a professional group; or

 

     evidence of scholarly or creative activities appropriate to this series.

 

Further, the candidate must:

 

1.        be certified by one of the medical specialty boards, or demonstrate equivalent achievement and recognition;

 

2.        be recognized as a consistently effective clinical teacher by undergraduate, graduate, or postgraduate students and by faculty;

 

3.        have excellent clinical skills and abilities and apply them in the management of clinical problems, as evidenced by the opinion of the faculty, house staff and appropriate professional groups;

 

4.        serve effectively as a clinical consultant to house staff, faculty, and members of the community; and

 

5.        actively and effectively participate in the affairs of professional organizations, UC San Diego Medical Center or VASDHS committees, School of Medicine or Pharmacy committees, University and administrative committees, and community programs.

 

Health Sciences Clinical Professor

 

A candidate for appointment to the rank of Health Sciences Clinical Professor should satisfy the above qualifications for Health Sciences Associate Clinical Professor. In addition, the candidate must:

 

1.        demonstrate superior clinical teaching;

 

2.        demonstrate superior clinical skills and abilities; and

 

3.        provide documentation that his or her clinical service and/or teaching are of great importance to the academic or health care missions of the University.

 

Transfer of faculty from one series to another, especially from the regular professorial series to the Health Sciences Clinical Professor series, should occur only in exceptional cases. Requests for such transfers must carefully document the specific achievements and future responsibilities in clinical care and teaching that qualify the candidate for such a transfer.

 

Faculty who demonstrate sustained, substantial scholarship that has an impact beyond UC San Diego should be considered for transfer to the Professor of Clinical X series. Examples of sustained, substantial scholarship include, but are not limited to, development of new diagnostic or therapeutic approaches and procedures that have been adopted regionally or nationally, publication of clinical case studies, creative design of teaching materials or textbooks used regionally or nationally, active participation in collaborative and joint research programs, or demonstrated effectiveness in establishing and supervising major teaching or clinical service programs, development of innovative health care programs that have had regional or national impact, or development of innovative computer software.