October 1990
Revised September 1999

PROCEDURES FOR APPOINTMENT AND REVIEW, LIBRARIAN SERIES, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA BARBARA

I. INTRODUCTION

In accordance with Sections 360-6 and 360-24, the Chancellor is delegated responsibility for providing for the review of qualification of candidates for appointment, merit increase, and promotion. The Chancellor has delegated to the University Librarian authority to approve (1) appointment of temporary and potential career personnel in the Librarian Series (Assistant Librarian, Associate Librarian, Librarian), or visiting Librarian Series, (2) merit increases for personnel in the same series, (3) promotions to career status, and (4) movement to career status.

The Executive Vice-Chancellor has assigned to the University Librarian the responsibility of receiving and transmitting all confidential recommendations concerning termination actions that are retained by the Executive Vice-Chancellor.

The University Librarian is advised on general personnel matters by the LAUC-SB Committee on Appointments, Assignments, and Reassignments (CAAR), Committee on Advancement and Promotion (CAP), and other agencies, as appropriate. These committees make recommendations to the University Librarian on membership of all ad hoc review and appointment committees and advise on policy and procedures of personnel matters in the Librarian Series. The Assistant University Librarian, Personnel coordinates the appointment and review processes for the University Librarian and advises the University Librarian on all aspects of recruiting, appointing and reviewing professional staff.

II. APPOINTMENT PROCEDURES

1. An appointment is defined in Section 360-8b as occurring when an individual is employed in one of the three ranks of the Librarian Series and when the individual's immediately previous status was:

   a. not in the employ of the University, or

   b. in the employ of the University, but not with a title in this series, or

   c. in the employ of the University in the Librarian Series on another campus (Intercampus transfer 360-8e)

2. An initial appointment to any rank in the Librarian Series may be a potential career appointment, or a temporary appointment, or a special temporary appointment.

   a. A potential career appointment has no definite date of termination and the appointee is one who may qualify, after a suitable trial period and careful review, for a continuing career appointment (360-17a). Substantive career status or notice of termination for those in potential career status must be completed by the end of the (1) fifth year for Assistant Librarians, (2) third year for Associate Librarian, and (3) 2-3 years for Librarian. A new appointee with an effective date of appointment in the period before January 1 of the review year receives one year of service credit.

   b. A Temporary Appointment or a Special Temporary appointment

   (1) shall have a specified date of termination,

   (2) shall ordinarily be for a period of one year or less, and shall not be for a period of more than two years;

   (3) may be converted into or followed by a potential career appointment, following appropriate review;

   (4) is automatically self-terminating, and notice of intention not to reappoint is not required;

   (5) is subject to the conditions relating to notice of termination in Sections 360-20a and 360-20d.

   (6) There is a limitation of how long a temporary librarian may serve at the University of California and each such appointee should be clearly advised of this.

C. Criteria for appointment to the Librarian Series are set forth in Sections 360-10a and 210-4e.

D. Preliminary Procedures for Appointment

1. Exit Interview

   a. Upon the resignation of a librarian, the Assistant/Associate University Librarian (AUL), Personnel, calls for an exit interview with the Library Administrative Council, the Chair of CAAR, the appropriate review initiator and/or Supervisor, the exiting employee, and others as appropriate to solicit suggestions which will aid in evaluating the position being vacated.

   b. Documentation to support recommendation on continuation, revision, or termination of the position may be provided by the exiting employee and review initiator(s).

2. Staff Planning Conference

   a. The AUL-Personnel convenes a staff planning conference to advise in what way to proceed, e.g., to fill, abolish, or reorganize or to convert it to staff personnel, general assistance or other. Preparation for the staff planning conference is initiated as soon as a vacancy exists or while creation of a position is under consideration.

   b. The responsible person, normally the review initiator, prepares the necessary documentation for the staff planning conference. The documentation includes as appropriate: (1) written statement justifying programmatic needs, (2) complete description of position responsibilities which includes duties and (3) draft position announcement including statement of qualifications, duration of position, etc. The AUL-Personnel forwards the documentation to all attendees, normally 48 hours or more in advance of the conference.

   c. The staff planning conference is normally composed of the Library Executive Council, the appropriate review initiator, the Chair of CAAR, and the Chair- designate of the ad hoc Appointment Committee, and if desired, the Assistant review initiator or appropriate supervisor. The University Librarian may invite as appropriate, other persons, including representatives from other agencies.

   d. The AUL-Personnel distributes a final draft of the description of position responsibilities and the position announcement to appropriate line officers and to the CAAR representatives who attended the Staff Planning Conference before it is announced or advertised.

All advertising and recruitment is done by the AUL-Personnel in accordance with University Policy including affirmative action, equal opportunity statements and specifications.

F. Formation of ad hoc Appointment Committees

1. The purpose of the ad hoc Appointment Committee is to review the qualifications of the applicants and to help assure that the best qualified librarians available are recommended for the position.

2. CAAR appoints one of its members to serve as chair of the ad hoc Appointment Committee. In addition, CAAR nominates a slate of five LAUC-SB members from which the University Librarian appoints three librarians to serve on the Appointment Committee. The UL appoints one member of the Cultural Diversity Committee to serve in a non- voting capacity and one staff member to serve in a voting capacity on each Appointment Committee. Members of the Appointment Committee will not normally have a supervisory or line structure relationship to the position.

3. In the case of an appointment to the Librarian Series in which subject expertise is involved or in which the appointee will be working closely with an academic department, the University Librarian may invite a member of the Academic Senate or another agency to serve on the committee in an advisory capacity. Notification of such an appointment is made by the University Librarian on behalf of the Executive Vice-Chancellor.

The AUL-Personnel sends out the position announcement to appropriate agencies, receives, and processes all applications received for the position. The AUL-Personnel makes all applications available to the department head, Library Executive Council, and the Appointment Committee for separate review.

1. Preliminary Review of Applicants

   a. After reviewing the applications separately, the appropriate AUL(s), the department head (via the line AUL) and the Appointment Committee each forwards written reports to the University Librarian via the AUL-Personnel. Normally, the line AUL consults with the AUL-Personnel. The AUL-Personnel coordinates all documentation for the presentation to the University Librarian. In accordance with affirmative action procedures, the AUL-Personnel prepares a report containing reasons for elimination of all applicants who are not recommended for further consideration.

   b. The preliminary review of applicants normally is concluded within ten working days of the closing date for applications.

2. Applicants Selected for Further Consideration

   a. Unless the announcement requires letters of reference, the AUL-Personnel requests references for all applicants selected for further consideration.

   b. The appropriate AUL(s), the department head, and the Appointment Committee review the references.

   c. The Appointment Committee, the appropriate AUL(s), and the department head (via the line AUL) forward written reports on which applicants should be interviewed to the AUL-Personnel. The AUL-Personnel coordinates the documentation and submits it to the University Librarian for final decision. All of II.G.2.a-c above may be performed in parallel and will normally not exceed 25 days.

   d. The AUL-Personnel schedules all interviews and informs appropriate persons.

   e. In addition to the department head, the University Librarian, and the Appointment Committee, the Library Executive Council, and other agencies, as appropriate, may each conduct an interview with each candidate. The Appointment Committee, and other agencies, if appropriate, forward written reports through the AUL-Personnel to the University Librarian.

   f. The appropriate AUL(s) and the department head (via the line AUL) forward recommendations on appointment to the University Librarian via the AUL-Personnel.

   g. The University Librarian reviews all recommendations and makes the final decision.

   h. The University Librarian makes offers of appointment in writing.

   i. When the offer of appointment has been accepted in writing, the AUL-Personnel informs the chairperson of the Appointment Committee and discharges the Appointment Committee.

   j. Upon discharge, committee members destroy confidential documentation and submit non-confidential documents to the chairperson of the CAAR for its files.

1. When the staff planning conference recommends a temporary academic appointment of 50%, or more FTE for more than one year, all requirements as for full- time positions must be met.

2. In the case of a temporary appointment for less than one year or less than 50% FTE:

   a. Normally a pool of locally available candidates is chosen.

   b. Advertising will be sufficiently widespread to insure reaching available group applicants;

   c. All other regular recruitment and appointment procedures apply.

3. The staff planning conference may decide to recommend dispensing with the regular procedures for recruitment and appointment to the Librarian's Series in order to act with greater speed. Such emergency appointments, made by the University Librarian, may not be extended beyond six months.

4. At the time of appointment, the University Librarian notifies personnel hired as temporary employees that University policy limits the amount of time they can spend in temporary status.

1. The University Librarian consults with LAUC-SB, via CAAR, when a special temporary appointment to the Librarian Series is being considered. The Chair of CAAR is included in discussions which relate to consideration of a possible special temporary appointment. The ad hoc Appointment Committee to review applicants to the position includes a CAAR member, selected by CAAR.

III. Performance Reviews and Advancement in the Librarians Series

A. Definitions

1. A promotion is an advancement to a higher rank within the Librarians Series, normally the next higher rank in the series.
2. A merit increase or "step increase" is an advancement in salary within the rank in the Librarian Series.
3. A continuance is the maintenance of the same rank and step, following review.
4. An accelerated merit or accelerated promotion is an action awarded ahead of completion of the normal number of intervals for that action. (See III.D.1.e of this document.)
5. An accelerated review is a performance review carried out ahead of completion of the normal interval since the last review precipitated either by a desire for accelerated advancement in the series or by a finding of deficient performance in the last review. An accelerated review may be requested by the candidate [see III.D.1.c; 360-80-d] or by the candidate's supervisor(s).
6. A deferment is the omission of a performance review in a year when a candidate's review would normally take place, due to a prolonged absence or other unusual circumstance. It is a neutral action which can be only be initiated with the written consent of the reviewee. (See III.D.1.f)
7. Career status is a continuing career appointment achieved after periodic reviews of performance, professional competence, achievement and promise, which indicate successful completion of a suitable period in potential career status. (See 360-17b)
8. The review initiator is considered to be the primary supervisor of the candidate for review. Ordinarily a department head or AUL, this person initiates the review in the sense of being responsible for the initial full evaluation of the candidate, which may encompass statements from secondary supervisors or evaluators of specific, limited activities.
9. The academic review record, often referred to as the "review packet" or "packet", is the set of documents related to the performance review of a particular librarians, as described by 360-80g. The review record or packet pertaining to a review cycle currently underway is normally housed in a single binder.
10. The call is a set of documents related to academic reviews which is distributed by the AUL-Personnel to all Librarians prior to the first action in a review cycle (see III.D.1.1a). The call provides each librarian with notice of his or her eligibility for review for merit increases, promotions and career status action; the calendar of due dates for the current review process; forms and procedures for the review process.

B. Criteria

C. Provision for Peer Review

1. Objective and thorough review of the performance of members of the Librarian Series by peers as well as administrators is mandated by 210-4b. Participation of an advisory review committee, composed of members of the Librarian Series, in each performance review, is in accord with this requirement. The report of the review committee is to form the basis for further administrative or committee review, according to 210-4f.
2. The LAUC-SB Committee on Advancement and Promotion (CAP) is composed of members of the Librarians Series, selected according to LAUC-SB procedures, as provided in 360-6b. Within its appointed review term, each CAP constitutes a standing review committee with the discretion to review the recommendations of ad hoc committees, and to independently advise the University Librarian on review actions for members of the Librarian Series. The chair of CAP participates with the Library Executive Council in the assignment of individual evaluations to ad hoc committees. During the review process, the chair of CAP and the AUL-Personnel both work with the ad hoc review committees insuring that procedures outlined in this document are followed. A member of CAP normally serves as chair of each ad hoc review committee.
3. Members of ad hoc review committees are appointed by the University Librarian, after nominations have been received from CAP. Each ad hoc review committee assesses the qualifications of candidates for specific review actions as provided in the review packets assigned to the committee, applying the criteria for advancement given in the APM. On completion of its deliberations on each review packet, the ad hoc committee prepares for consideration by the University Librarian a written account of its analysis, referring to supporting documentation, and an appropriate recommendation for a specific review action.
4. In general, a committee member who has acted in a line supervisorial capacity for a candidate, within the period under review, will not participate in peer review committee deliberations on an evaluation of that candidate. In addition, any committee member who, for various reasons, may lack objectivity with regard to a candidate's performance in the period under review, should refrain from participating in the evaluation of that candidate. If, despite having been assigned a particular review packet, a committee member perceives a possible conflict of interest with regard to the candidate, the committee member will be excused from deliberations on that packet.
5. The deliberations of CAP are to be strictly confidential; both the membership and the deliberations of ad hoc committees are to be strictly confidential, as required by 210- 4c. At the time when a review committee releases a review packet, all committee notes relating to the deliberations on that packet are destroyed. In the interest of preserving confidentiality, the AUL-Personnel (understood to the designee of the Chancellor under the requirements of 360-80j and 210-4d(2)) normally acts as a liaison between review committees and all other parties to a review, transmitting review packets, committee requests or instructions and fulfillments thereof, to parties concerned.

D. Procedures for performance reviews

1. Initiation of reviews

   a. As required by 360-80c-d, and the MOU, no later than 30 days before the due date of the first action of the regular review cycle, the AUL-Personnel issues to each librarian the call, which consists of:

   (1) a notice of his or her eligibility for review,
   (2) a copy of the review schedule for the year, giving completion deadlines for each sequence of the cycle,
   (3) a set of instructions for reviews, based on the APM and this document, and
   (4) a copy of the evaluation form (Review of Qualifications, Librarian series).

   b. The AUL-Personnel makes a comprehensive list of persons scheduled for review actions in the current review cycle in keeping with the frequency for review at various levels required by 360-80a(1), computing eligibility on the basis of number of intervals since each candidate's review. This list is verified by the AUL's and the Chair of CAP for each candidate's status. Copies of the final list are distributed to Library review initiators and members of CAP, prior to the first scheduled action of the review cycle.

   c. As provided in 360-80d, a librarian not normally scheduled for review may request, in writing, from his or her primary supervisor, an accelerated review to coincide with the current cycle, no later than 30 days before the first scheduled action of the current cycle. The review initiator forwards the request, accompanied by the review initiator's written statement of intent to review the candidate ahead of schedule, to the AUL- Personnel, no later than 10 days prior to the first scheduled action. The AUL-Personnel amends the list of candidates to be reviewed, or inform other parties concerned, as necessary.

   d. Librarians may be scheduled for an off cycle review, subject to the approval of the University Librarian, if there is reason to doubt that the career appointee is performing satisfactorily, in keeping with the 360-17b(5). In these cases, the candidate receives from the University Librarian a written statement of the need for acceleration of review. The off cycle review follows the same procedures in evaluating that librarian as are followed for other librarians reviewed in that year.

   e. Should a review initiator judge that the performance of a librarian warrants consideration for an accelerated merit or promotion, the review initiator follows the same procedures in evaluating that librarian as are followed for other librarians reviewed in that year.

   f. Deferment of review may be sought by the candidate or, with the consent of the candidate, by the review initiator, when there has been insufficient evidence to evaluate performance due to prolonged absence or other unusual circumstances within the period under review. Requests for deferment, setting forth the reasons, must be made in writing, and must be submitted to the candidate or review initiator, as appropriate; to the AUL with the line responsibility for the candidate; and to CAP, for written recommendations at these levels, before being considered by the University Librarian, as required by 360-80a(2). If approved by the University Librarian, the deferment is for a period of one year regardless of the candidate's normal cycle.

   g. Candidates at Associate Librarian, Step VII or Librarian, Step IV, who do not wish to be considered for merit or promotion actions, are not required to undergo evaluation for these actions, unless the candidate requests an earlier review, in keeping with 360-80a(1); reviews must be conducted at these points every third year (with one exception: those at Associate Librarian, Step VII, have an initial two-year review following assumption of that step). Reviews in such cases are subject to the same procedural requirements and criteria as reviews for merit actions, though the action sought will normally be continuance.

2. Deadlines for Completion

   Deadlines for completion of each step in the review process, in keeping with the schedule or "review calendar" distributed in the call, are to be adhered to by all parties to a review. Any participant relaying a packet to another participant at a point later than the scheduled deadline will include in the packet a written statement detailing reasons for the delay.

3. The Candidate

   a. Reviews the formal statement of position responsibilities and updates it to reflect responsibilities in the period under review. If changes are necessary, secures revision of statement through administrative channels.

   b. May prepare for the review initiator a list of persons from whom letters may be solicited (at the discretion of the review initiator) to aid the review initiator in assessing the qualifications of the candidate or evaluating specific activities, in accord with 360-80e.

   c. May prepare for the review initiator a list of persons who, in the view of the candidate, for reasons set forth, might not objectively evaluate the candidate's qualifications or performance, in a letter or on a review committee, in accord with 360- 80f. (In cases of naming persons preferred to be excluded from the review committees, the candidate may send a copy of the list to the current Chair of CAP as well.)

   d. Participates in one or more preliminary review conferences with the review initiator and, if appropriate, secondary supervisors. Any lists of names prepared by the candidate (as in III.D.3.b-c, above) should be discussed in the course of the conference(s).

   e. Reviews copy of U.C. form, "Biography for Academic Personnel", maintained in the Library Personnel Office, and updates as appropriate.

   f. Using the form, Review of Qualifications, Librarian Series, (distributed in the call) prepares a factual resume of activities and accomplishments for the period under review.

   (1) For merit action or if a candidate is at the top of a range (Associate, Step VII or Librarian, Step IV, and not going for promotion), the resume must cover the period since the last review.

   (2) If a promotion action is considered, the resume must encompass the full span of the candidate's career with U.C. Candidates who have completed six years of service at the Assistant Librarian rank are required to prepare a resume for promotion action. Candidates at Assistant, Steps IV-VI and Associate Steps V-VII are normally eligible for promotion consideration. Eligible candidates need not secure approval from the review initiator to be considered for promotion.

   (3) The resume should provide evidence of professional competence and quality of service within the library, as required by 210-4e(3)(a). Service within the library is understood to encompass responsibilities, LAUC-SB and other committee work within the library.

   (4) As applicable, the resume may also contain evidence of:

   (a) professional activity outside the library (210-4e(3)b);
   (b) University and public service (210-4e(3)c);
   (c) research and other creative activity (210-4e(3)d).

   g. Submits his or her review packet (the set of documents prepared as in III.D.3.a-c and e-f, above, together with remaining, unmarked sections of the Review of Qualifications form) to the review initiator. If further documentation or evidence to be included in the review packet is requested by the review initiator, the candidate responds to the request in a timely manner.

   h. Receives and reads the evaluation prepared by the review initiator. Participates in a conference with the review initiator and, as appropriate, secondary supervisors, to discuss the evaluation. May request from the review initiator a written summary or redacted copies of the substance of all confidential documents (without disclosure of identities of their authors) which have been used by the review initiator in evaluating the candidate, in accord with 360-80a(2)g. If a request for a written summary or redacted copies is not made, he or she receives an oral summary or redacted copies from the review initiator.

   i. Reviews and signs (to acknowledge having read) all non-confidential items added to the review packet by others. May make written response to the substance of summaries, including confidential summaries, evaluation or review conferences, within scheduled intervals. May add to the packet any further documentation or evidence deemed necessary which can be provided in a timely manner, in response to summaries, evaluations, review conferences, or request of review committees.

   j. In accordance with 360-80h, the candidate signs the documentation checklist and certification statement on completion of all review conferences. If non-confidential items are later added to the packet, the candidate dates and initials the new items.

   k. Receives a written notice from the University Librarian of the final administrative action taken on his or her review, as required by 360-80l. The candidate may request and receive from the University Librarian a statement explaining the final decision.

   l. At the scheduled conclusion of the review cycle, or any time thereafter, the candidate may request and receive from the University Librarian a written summary or redacted copies of the substance of all confidential documents considered in deter mining the final review action for the period under review. Such a summary or redacted copies includes the substance of comments from reviewing committees, as well as from confidential letters, but without disclosure of their authors and without separation of one body of comments from another, according to 210-4c(1). The University Librarian provides such a written summary or redacted copies within 30 working days of the candidate's request, in keeping with MOU Article V.c.

4. The Review Initiator and Secondary Evaluators

   a. The review initiator schedules and conducts one or more preliminary review conferences with the candidate, in keeping with 360-80e, to discuss the review at hand and insure that the candidate is adequately informed about the criteria applied in considering review actions, and about the entire review process. Secondary supervisor(s) responsible for elements of the evaluation will be present for at least one preliminary review conference. The applicability of the formal statement of position responsibilities to the period under review and the role of secondary or previous supervisors should be discussed in or before the preliminary review conferences. Any lists of names prepared by the candidate (as in III.D.3.c-d, above) should be discussed in the conference. Participants should reach an understanding of subsequent steps in the process each are to follow.

   b. If appropriate, the review initiator requests confidential, evaluative letters from persons in a position to assess the qualifications or particular activities of the candidate in the period under review, including a reasonable number of persons whose names have been supplied by the candidate, but not limited to persons suggested by the candidate, in keeping with 360-30e. Requests for letters of evaluation will be in writing, specifying activities or qualifications of the candidate to be evaluated, and each will contain a statement regarding the University's policy on confidentiality of such evaluative letters. Requests for such letters, as well as the letters themselves, are included in the confidential sections of the review packet. Open letters may also be requested and included in the review packet.

   c. Unsolicited statements used in a review appear in the non-confidential portion of the review packet, unless received with the understanding that they are is to be held in confidence.

   d. The review initiator receives and reviews the resume of activities composed by the candidate, together with the review packet. The review initiator may meet with the candidate to discuss the contents of the packet.

   e. If appropriate, the review initiator distributes copies of the packet or sections thereof, including appropriate confidential items, to secondary supervisors. Secondary supervisors compose evaluations of specific areas of the candidate's responsibilities or activities for the period under review, as assigned by the review initiator, in a timely manner. These evaluations may be entered on sections of the Review of Qualifications form, or on separate pages which may be inserted in the review packet.

   f. The review initiator composes a substantive, written evaluation of the candidate's performance for the period under review, using appropriate sections of the Review of Qualifications form. The review initiator in all cases writes the summary evaluative comments, proposing and supporting a particular review action. In cases wherein the review initiator is the immediate supervisor, he or she provides detailed evaluation preceding summary evaluative comments, as well.

   g. Each section of the evaluation, whether prepared by the review initiator or a secondary supervisor, should be specific, thorough, and adequately supported by documentation within the review packet; and should adhere to the criteria for evaluation given in 360-10 and 210-4e.

   h. On completing the evaluation, the review initiator returns the review packet, excluding any confidential items, to the candidate. The review initiator schedules a conference with the candidate (which may also include secondary supervisors) to discuss the evaluation and recommendation for action, allowing at least one intervening day for the candidate to read the evaluation. Upon the written request of the candidate, the review initiator provides a written summary or redacted copies of the substance of confidential letters used in evaluating the candidate. If the candidate does not request a written summary or redacted copies, the review initiator orally summarizes the substance of confidential items.

   i. Following the evaluation conference, the candidate is allowed three days to compose a response to the contents of the written evaluation and evaluation conference. When the candidate has completed, at his or her discretion, a written response or at minimum, has acknowledged with his or her signature having read the evaluation, the review packet is returned to the review initiator.

   j. On reviewing the candidate's response, if any, the review initiator forwards the complete review packet to the appropriate AUL or designated committee of AUL's. Copies of the candidate's written response may be forwarded to appropriate secondary supervisors, as well.

5. Reviewing Officer(s): AUL or Committee of AULs

   a. Examines the review packet for completeness and adherence to the standards for evaluation set forth in the APM; requests any additional information or evaluative letters (as in III.D.3.b and d, above) deemed necessary. Any non-confidential information added to the review packet will have been read and signed by the candidate; and the candidate will be informed of the nature of any new confidential material added to the packet, in keeping with 360-80j.

   b. When satisfied that the review packet meets the standards required by the APM, schedules and conducts a conference with the candidate and review initiator to discuss the review.

   c. Following the review conference, prepares a summary evaluative statement proposing and supporting a particular review action. Returns the evaluation to the candidate for his or her response or comments and signature. The candidate must return the evaluation to the AUL(s) no later than three working days after receiving the review packet and summary evaluation. Absence of the candidate's signature (acknowledging having read the evaluation) or signature by proxy must be explained by the AUL(s).

   d. When the review initiator is an AUL, the foregoing steps are conducted by a committee of AULs (excluding the review initiator) appointed by the University Librarian.

   e. Transmits the full review packet to the AUL-Personnel, who forwards it to an ad- hoc review committee.

6. Ad Hoc Peer Review Committees and CAP

   Each committee reviews evaluations assigned to it in accordance with the requirements of 210-4 and the principles set forth in III.C.1-5 or this document.

   At minimum, a three-member review committee, including at least one member of CAP, deliberate on each review packet. In cases where a committee member has been absented from deliberations due to unforeseen conflict of interest, illness or other circumstances, resulting in an extant committee of less than three or absence of a CAP member, the vacancy is filled by the temporary appointment of a new committee member by the University Librarian, in consultation with CAP.

   c. If appropriate, the committee may request, in writing, additional information or letters deemed necessary for committee analysis, via the AUL-Personnel. (The AUL- Personnel acts on behalf of the committee in submitting a request to the appropriate agency or person, preserving the confidentiality of the committee). Any additional, non- confidential information received by the committee will have been read and signed by the candidate. The candidate is informed of the nature of any new confidential material, prior to the report of the committee, which is added to the review packet.

   d. On completion of its deliberations, the ad-hoc committee prepares a written report of its analysis for each evaluation. In keeping with 210-4f(1), the report provides an assessment of all significant evidence, favorable and unfavorable; is specific and analytical; is adequately documented by references to supporting material; sets forth the committee's evaluation of the candidate with respect to the qualifications specified; and includes a recommendation to the University Librarian for a specific review action.

   e. If the committee cannot reach a unanimous decision on a recommendation for a review action, the division of the committee and the reasons are communicated either in the body of the report or in separate concurring or dissenting statements by individual members, submitted with the main report and with the cognizance of other committee members, in accord with 210-4f(2).

   f. The final, comprehensive report(s), with recommendation(s) of the review committee, released for submission to the University Librarian and bearing the signatures of the committee members, are considered the report(s) of CAP, in fulfillment of 360-80i. The report(s), along with the full review packet, are transmitted to the University Librarian, via the AUL-Personnel.

7. The University Librarian and Vice Chancellor

   a. The University Librarian reviews all evaluations and makes a decision on the final action in cases where merit, promotion, career status, or continuance are judged to be warranted; and formulates a recommendation for action to be forwarded to the Executive Vice Chancellor in cases where -termination is considered.

   b. In cases of promotion, conferral or denial of career status, or recommendation for termination, the University Librarian provides notice of his or her tentative decision or recommendation to LAUC-SB-CAP when that decision or recommendation does not concur with that of the review committee, indicating the reasons and asking for further information which might support a different decision, in keeping with 360-80k. LAUC- SB-CAP is given an opportunity to respond to or comment on the University Librarian's statement in these cases, before a final decision is issued.

   c. The University Librarian forwards all necessary documents relating to termination actions to the Executive Vice Chancellor, who makes the final decision in these cases. The Executive Vice Chancellor provides a notice of his or her tentative decision to the University Librarian in cases wherein that decision does not concur with that of the University Librarian, giving the reasons, and providing opportunity for the University Librarian to comment (as in III.D.7.b, again fulfilling 360-80.k). The Executive Vice Chancellor may also choose to confer with LAUC-SB-CAP on matters of procedure and documentation supporting particular recommendations, as appropriate in individual cases.

   d. The University Librarian informs each candidate, in writing, of the final administrative action for his or her review, in a timely manner. In the event of an unfavorable decision, the written statement includes the reasons for the decision. If a candidate received notice of a favorable decision which does not outline reasons for the decision, the candidate may request and receive a separate statement from the University Librarian providing reasons for the decision, in keeping with 360-80.l.

   e. At the conclusion of the review cycle or any time thereafter, upon the request of a candidate, the University Librarian provides the candidate with a written summary or redacted copies of all confidential documents considered in determining the final review action, within the limitations set forth in III.D.3.1 above, and in 360-80.l.

8. The Library Personnel Officer (AUL-Personnel)

   In addition to responsibilities as stated above:

   a. At the conclusion of the review cycle and no later than August 1 of each year, prepares and sends to the Chair of CAP a statistical summary or redacted copies of the recommendations and final decision for review actions of the completed cycle.

   b. Retains the completed review materials.