Faculty Rank and Promotion Policy

This rank and promotion policy is intended to provide clarity and specificity regarding the types of activities that should be used 1) to recommend initial rank and 2) that current faculty can use to build a record of achievement worthy of promotion. Promotion represents an acknowledgement of demonstrated faculty contributions to education, clinical care, research and service, as well as a consistent commitment to the mission, vision, goals and values of the College of Osteopathic Medicine (COM). The procedures of this policy are designed to assist faculty in meeting promotion requirements and complying with application deadlines in order to enhance the likelihood of a successful outcome. The policy also provides guidance to reviewers to ensure a fair and objective process.

Faculty Titles

Full-Time Faculty Titles (ranked from lowest to highest): 

Full time faculty are defined in the Employment Classifications Policy.

1. Instructor
2. Assistant Professor
3. Associate Professor 
4. Professor

Adjunct Faculty Titles (ranked from lowest to highest): 

Adjunct Faculty are defined in the Employment Classifications Policy.

1. Adjunct Instructor
2. Adjunct Assistant Professor
3. Adjunct Associate Professor
4. Adjunct Professor

Clinical Preceptor Faculty (ranked from lowest to highest): 

Clinical preceptor faculty are licensed DO and MD physicians primarily employed in a clinical practice, who teach OMS III, OMS IV students, and/or resident physicians while on their rotations. The preceptor faculty are credentialed by the Office of Community Clinical Education (OCCE).

1. Clinical Instructor
2. Clinical Assistant Professor
3. Clinical Associate Professor
4. Clinical Professor

Affiliate Faculty Titles (ranked from lowest to highest): 

Affiliate faculty are individuals who hold a terminal degree in their discipline but are not physicians (DO or MD) and are primarily employed in a clinical practice setting, affiliated with a Clinical Preceptor’s practice that hosts OMS III, OMS IV students and/or resident physicians. Affiliate faculty are appointed based on their qualifications and educational contributions and may be considered for promotion through the Affiliate Faculty rank structure in accordance with this policy. Their credentials are reviewed by the OCCE.

1. Affiliate Instructor 
2. Affiliate Assistant Professor 
3. Affiliate Associate Professor 
4. Affiliate Professor

Initial Rank

At the time of initial hire/or appointment the typically assigned rank assigned to full-time faculty will be Assistant Professor, for Adjunct faculty will be Adjunct Assistant Professor, and for preceptors will be Clinical Assistant Professor, and for Affiliate faculty, Affiliate Assistant Professor, unless otherwise determined. In general, appointment at the Assistant Professor level (or equivalent rank within the Adjunct, Clinical, or Affiliate faculty tracks) requires either a terminal degree appropriate to the discipline or board certification, as applicable. Individuals who do not meet these qualifications may be considered for appointment at the Instructor level (or equivalent Instructor rank within their respective faculty track). The Dean of the COM may assign a higher initial rank during the contract negotiation phase after consultation with the Rank and Promotion Committee (RPC) Chair. 

For appointment at a rank higher than Assistant Professor the Dean will take into consideration Chair of the RPC’s recommendations, the applicant’s rank at previous universities, teaching, research/scholarly activities, patient care, service, and any other relevant factors in consideration of the promotion criteria outlined below.

Eligibility for Promotion

Faculty in the College of Osteopathic Medicine are typically eligible to apply for promotion after serving a minimum of five years in their current rank. Prior service at another institution may be considered toward this requirement in accordance with this policy; however, all candidates must have completed at least 12 continuous months of active faculty service at CHSU immediately preceding their application for promotion.

In addition, Adjunct faculty, Clinical Preceptor faculty, and Affiliate faculty are eligible to apply for promotion after demonstrating 24 continuous months of consistent and regular teaching service at CHSU. Eligibility requires a sustained level of educational contribution that is determined by the department chair or immediate supervisor to be sufficient based on the faculty member's assigned teaching responsibilities, reliability, and overall contribution to the educational mission of the College.

A faculty member may initiate the promotion process at the start of their last requisite year of service Credit for time served in a particular rank at previous institutions at which the applicant worked may be permitted including full time or part time as deemed applicable by the RPC. Credit for part-time service may be considered.

No Tenure Offered

COM does not offer tenure track positions for any faculty member.

Application for Promotion Process and Timeframe 

Preparation of Portfolio (Any Time During the Academic Year)

Having attained eligibility for promotion as noted above, a faculty member must be the one to initiate the formal process of promotion by first submitting a letter of intent to the department chair or immediate supervisor per the deadlines in the appendix of the current academic year. Followed by preparing and submitting a portfolio that summarizes and documents their academic credentials and professional/academic accomplishments. Specifically, faculty seeking promotion to a higher rank will be evaluated on how they have successfully met the qualifications of the higher rank relative to, and appropriate for, their current position. The portfolio shall contain the content and be in the format as described in this policy. The purpose of the portfolio is to showcase the faculty member’s achievements so as to justify promotion by illustrating that required promotion criteria have been met or exceeded. Promotion shall be primarily based on achievements since the last promotion; prior achievements may be considered to demonstrate consistent productivity. These guidelines are intended to help faculty effectively use the portfolio as a tool to document and showcase their achievements in a clear, well-organized format. Faculty must submit their portfolio to the Department Chair or immediate supervisor for consideration in order to provide adequate time for review.

Faculty members who hold a combined administrative and faculty appointment in the COM may request specific administrative responsibilities be considered as evidence for promotion. Justification for the substitution must be clearly explained, both quantitatively and qualitatively, in the letter of intent submitted by the applicant to the Department Chair or immediate supervisor of the applicant. This letter will be included in the applicant’s portfolio.

The portfolio shall be submitted electronically as a single PDF document to the department chair/supervisor. The contents of the portfolio should be arranged as follows:

1. Cover Letter requesting a portfolio review for promotion in rank.
2. Curriculum vitae – professional credentials and education
   • College/University – dates/degree obtained 
   • Graduate school – dates/degree obtained 
   • Medical school – dates/degree obtained 
   • GME Training – dates 
   • Practice – Specialty 
   • Employment Experience – include time and rank 
   • Certification/Licenses 
   • Honors/Awards 
   • Publications 
   • Posters and Presentations

3. Accomplishments in teaching, emphasizing annual trends when archived data are available

            • This could take the form of a teaching portfolio

4. Accomplishments in scholarship should also emphasize trended data
5. Accomplishments in service should be an ordered, clear, succinct presentation of data regarding internal and external service over time.
6. A description and documentation of clinical duties if applicable
7. A minimum of one external letter of support from external evaluators shall be requested and obtained by the applicant and included in the portfolio. All letters must come from individuals who have knowledge/expertise in the areas of the faculty member’s performance and contributions. These letters should address the individual’s potential for promotion.
8. A minimum of two additional letters of support from CHSU faculty and/or administrators, preferably from individuals holding the same or higher rank as the rank being sought.
9. Additional supporting evidence may be included in an appendix.

Formation of a Rank and Promotion Committee

The structure and composition of the RPC is described in the COM Governing Statute 3C College Governance and Roles of the Faculty Committees. The RPC may also annually review the criteria and guidelines for promotion in rank of COM faculty and recommend revisions as necessary to the Dean of the COM to maintain consistency with the mission and needs of the COM.

Review of Portfolio by the Department Chair or Immediate Supervisor

The first step in evaluating the applicant’s portfolio will be conducted by the Department Chair or immediate supervisor. The Department Chair or immediate supervisor will review the completed portfolio and determine whether to recommend the applicant for promotion. As part of this review, the Department Chair or immediate supervisor also reviews the applicant’s annual performance evaluations completed since the applicant’s last promotion and, if applicable, relevant performance evaluations from previous employers. The Department Chair/Immediate Supervisor prepare a written recommendation, which shall reflect consideration of both the completed portfolio and these performance evaluations. The written recommendation must clearly state whether the Department Chair or immediate supervisor supports or does not support the applicant’s request for promotion. The Department Chair or immediate supervisor shall add the recommendation letter to the applicant’s portfolio and deliver the complete portfolio to the Chair/Co-Chair of the RPC by February 1. Portfolios that are incomplete or not received by the RPC by February 1 will not be considered during the current review cycle and will be deferred to the following year A Department Chair/Supervisor’s lack of support of the applicant’s request for promotion will not prevent the portfolio-review process from continuing as outlined below.

Review of Portfolio by the Rank and Promotion Committee

The RPC is responsible for assessing faculty for rank and promotion given their contribution to education, scholarship and service as appropriate to the COM.

 After receiving the completed portfolio from the Department Chair/supervisor, the RPC will convene to determine their recommendation for promotion in a rank.

 Prior to the Committee deliberations, each member of the committee will confirm that, individually, they have no conflict that would prevent them from fairly evaluating the applicant for promotion. 

“Equal or Greater Rank Rule” - Deliberation and voting by faculty members is restricted to faculty currently of equal or higher rank than the candidate’s current rank. This is to ensure a level of sufficient seniority and experience among those making decisions about the advancement of other faculty members. Ex-Officio members or their representatives are excluded from this deliberation restriction. 

The RPC shall review the promotion criteria. The RPC must critically review the documentation related to a faculty member’s application for promotion in rank and determine if the faculty meets the pre-specified qualifications for the higher rank as outlined in this policy. The RPC will be provided with the letter prepared by the Department Chair/Supervisor regardless of whether the Department Chair/Supervisor supports the applicant’s request for promotion. 

The RPC shall vote for or against recommending promotion. If there is a tie between the voting members of the RPC the Chair of the committee shall also cast a vote in order to break the tie. The Committee may request additional information from the applicant before finalizing their recommendation. The Chair of the Promotion Committee shall forward the vote tally and written recommendations, which will be either a recommendation for promotion or a recommendation against promotion, along with a rationale for the decision and the applicant’s portfolio to the Dean of the COM by April 1. 

The RPC Chair will remind the committee that any member who disagrees with the decision has the right to submit a separate written evaluation to the Dean of the COM. 

Deliberations and final voting outcomes are to remain confidential.

Review by the Dean of the COM

The Dean of the COM shall review the applicant’s portfolio along with the recommendation regarding promotion from the RPC. The Dean of the COM will critically review the documentation related to a faculty member’s application for promotion in rank and determine if the faculty meets the pre-specified qualifications for the higher rank explained in this policy. The Dean of the COM may further consult with the Chair of the RPC for additional insight regarding the candidate’s application and the committee’s recommendations.

The Dean of the COM will make a determination regarding the applicant’s promotion by May 1. If the Dean of the COM needs additional time to review and make a determination regarding the promotion request, the Dean of the COM shall inform the applicant, RPC, and the department Chair/supervisor of the revised timeline to complete their review.

If the promotion is denied by the Dean of the COM, the Dean of the COM shall draft a statement supporting the decision and citing deficiencies to the applicant, the RPC Chair, and the applicant’s immediate supervisor.

If the promotion is granted, the Dean of the COM shall notify the applicant, Human Resources, the RPC Chair and the applicant’s immediate supervisor about the decision. Unless otherwise noted, all promotions will become effective at the start of the next fiscal year on July 1. 

A promotion in academic rank does not guarantee a change in the candidate's remuneration.

Appeal of the Decision

If an applicant is denied promotion by the Dean, the applicant may appeal the decision to the CHSU President or designee by submitting a written explanation detailing the justification of the appeal. An appeal must be submitted within thirty (30) business days of notification of the Dean’s decision. The President shall review all relevant information and documents and render a decision about the appeal and notify the applicant of the outcome within thirty (30) business days. The decision of the President is final.

Promotion of Criteria by Category

Promotion is determined on a case-by-case basis and based on the needs of the COM. Meeting the criteria listed below should not be construed as guaranteeing promotion.

1. Promotion Guideline 

   The following three tables outline non-exhaustive criteria for evaluation of a candidate’s portfolio to determine whether promotion criteria have been satisfied. Criteria are divided into education, scholarship and service categories