Required Annual Documents

The following are required annual documents, to be submitted before June 30:

  • A current Curriculum Vitae (all in-scope faculty, and medical faculty seeking promotion*)
  • Forms 1&2** (in-scope faculty)
  • Teaching Dossier (in-scope faculty, encouraged for medical faculty)
  • Administrative Dossier (encouraged for faculty with significant administrative duties)

* Medical faculty may also be asked by department heads to provide a current CV at their periodic academic reviews

**Forms 1&2 are simply tools designed to assist faculty with keeping their CVs up-to-date and assist reviewers in understanding recent changes to the CV, presented in summary form.

CV Information

In order to ensure that the information in the Curriculum Vitae is fully understood by any reviewer, faculty are asked to provide the following annotations as comments or appendices, in reference to publications, grants, and awards:

  • indicate the percentage individual contribution to collaborative work, particularly for jointly authored publications
  • indicate whether senior or corresponding author
  • provide copies of letters/emails indicating acceptance for publication of papers cited as in press
  • page numbers and journal numbers for all publications
  • for grants awarded, an indication of the award date, the term of the award, and whether peer reviewed or non-peer reviewed
  • the significance, frequency, criteria of awards received

For multi-authored grants, both the role of the faculty member and the number of investigators involved must be outlined. For awards with a term of more than one year, such as a research grant with funds released over the course of several years, the award should be reported on Form 1 once only, in the year in which the award is made. Although the award is recognized each year as evidence of ongoing research activity, for salary review purposes the meritorious accomplishment is considered only in the year in which the award is first made.

For industry-based research, it is important to state the type of contribution or percentage contribution involved. For pharmaceutical-sponsored research, in particular, there can be a wide range of involvement. For example, within the designation of principal investigator for a drug trial, an investigator’s involvement can range from being asked to design and coordinate the trial, including authoring the results for publication, to simply being approached by the sponsoring company to sign up patients for the trial.

Forms, guidelines and templates for required documents

Further information can be found on the Vice Provost’s website, as well as:

Assignment of duties

Note: The following content is being reviewed and revised. Strictly speaking, assignment of duties applies only to employed faculty, while academic duties/deliverables are negotiated with other CoM faculty. Some of the terminologies, processes and categorizations used in this section are outdated due to CoM faculty and governance restructuring. For instance, contractual academic deliverables for faculty engaged through academic clinical funding plans (ACFPs) are now monitored annually as part of a contractual review of the individual’s service agreement. Another significant recent change is the discarding of “community faculty” and “full time faculty” terminologies. Further governance and procedural changes will affect the content on this page significantly. Over time, the current content will be modified or replaced.

These comments notwithstanding, current processes and requirements for the assignment of duties for in-scope faculty remain in place, subject to the Dean’s ongoing approval. Principles of accountability remain firm and unchanged, irrespective of any future procedural amendments. There is an expectation that department heads shall be able to provide to the dean, on request, accurate summaries of individual and group academic services provided so that they can be compared to the services agreed upon and funded through contractual, stipendiary or employment arrangements.

Salary review procedures

This section is only relevant for employed faculty governed by the 2014-2017 USFA Collective Agreement. The rules and procedures governing salary review and the award of special increases and career development increases are described in Article 17 of the agreement.

As per the agreement, the process for Salary Review in the colleges is the work of Department Salary Committees, a College Salary Committee for Department Heads and Assistant Deans, and the College Review Committee (Art. 17.3).  Guidelines have been established in each department and in the college.   The College Review Committee standards for awarding merit increase apply to all faculty members governed by the collective agreement. All faculty who receive either standard or special increase treatment at the Department level are reviewed by the CRC if the required documentation is available. Your department office or the office of Faculty Affairs can provide you with your departmental standards for awarding merit.

Annual review procedures

All CoM faculty are expected to undergo regular academic review. For medical faculty, the appointment review process is described here.