CAP Committee for 2001-02:
Susan Moon, Chair; Eric Forte, Lorna Lueck, Lucia Snowhill

This year thirteen librarians were scheduled for review and thirteen were completed. Most reviews were received, reviewed and commented upon in a timely manner. There were, however, a few which did not follow the stated timetable. This hampers everyone who participates in the peer review process. We recommend that all librarians be encouraged to "respect the process." Extenuating circumstances notwithstanding, everyone has an obligation to their colleagues to conform to set deadlines.

This year’s CAP committee made the following recommendations:

• Update the existing tips and suggestions to reflect appropriate references to the (MOU) Memo of Understanding as well as the APM (Academic Personnel Manual), that are referred to on the LAUC CAP pages.
• Clarify how questions which arise in the review process are to be dealt with: immediate review committee, CAP committee, AUL, Human Resources.
• Standardize instructions and supporting documentation for the review committees.
  Up to this point, it was up to the CAP committee to suggest or recommend appropriate sections of the APM, MOU, and local instructions for peer review evaluation.
• List all the most pertinent documents be listed, along with their urls, for ease of consultation.

CAP 2000-01
Ad Hoc CAP Committee activity

Last year’s CAP committee’s was asked to

1. clarify criteria for confidential vs. nonconfidential letters in review packets (completed)
2. "… to address any local academic review procedures stemming from the new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)"

An ad hoc committee composed of the above individuals met to revise the document, THEPROCEDURES FOR APPOINTMENT AND REVIEW, LIBRARIAN SERIES, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA BARBARA. (http://www.library.ucsb.edu/lauc/procedur.html). This group revised this document adding, deleting, or clarifying instructions as seemed appropriate to incorporate the MOU. In the later portion of 2001 the revised document was submitted to the AUL, Human Resources for her purview. She submitted a new document to this group which the again went through for conformity and clarification according to the MOU. The revised document was re-submitted to the AUL, Human Resources in February 2002. In October, Susan Moon and Detrice Bankhead reviewed the suggested changes in the second document. The ad hoc committee now needs to review the AUL’s changes.

Respectfully submitted, Susan Moon, Chair.