About Deferrals
With appropriate justification, a candidate may request that a review be deferred for one year upon the endorsement of the Department Chair and approval of the Divisional Dean. A second consecutive deferral request must be approved by the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
- It is not appropriate to request a deferral due to lack of participation by the candidate. An appointee may request deferral if there is evidence that work in progress will have results within the year and will impact the outcome of the review.
- Deferral may be justified if the candidate has been on a long-term leave over the review period and can show that work initiated while on leave will yield important results within a year.
- Deferral requests must be received in the Dean's Office no later than October 15. Once a review is initiated at the department level, a deferral should not be requested if it appears that the file does not warrant advancement. The recommendation in that instance may be a "no change."
- An academic appointee may request a deferral due to unexpected circumstances such as serious illness.
- Assistant level appointees cannot defer except as allowed under Family Accommodations. Non-salaried appointees are not eligible to defer academic reviews.
Policy is located in PPM 230-28 on page 26 and states:
With appropriate justification, an appointee may request that his or her regularly scheduled academic review be deferred. An appointee may request a maximum of two consecutive deferrals. Obtaining approval of a deferral request is the only alternative to recommending a no-change action.
An appointee may request a deferral of his or her academic review when:
- there is evidence that work in progress will come to fruition within the year and that having the additional year will make a difference in the result of the next review; or
- circumstances beyond the appointee's control have impacted his or her productivity (i.e., illness, family member's illness, etc.).
The appropriate dean has the authority to approve the first deferral request. The Senior Vice Chancellor must approve a second consecutive deferral request. In general, the following appointees are not eligible to defer academic reviews: Assistant-rank appointees (except when approved as a family accommodation; see PPM 230-15, Family Accommodations), non-salaried Adjunct Professors, and appointees with established ending dates (term appointments).
Deferral requests must be submitted to the appointee's department(s) no later than October 15.
About No Change Actions
A no-change action is appropriate when:
- No Change actions recommended by the Department Chair due to a non-participatory candidate should be commented on in the Department Chair's letter
- A complete file should be submitted along with the No Change request
- See File Deadlines for no change due dates
Policy is located in PPM 230-28 on page 27 and states:
An academic review file must be prepared and submitted for review for an appointee serving in the final year of the normal period at step1, even if the appointee is not recommended for advancement. A department should propose a no-change action if productivity is not sufficient to justify advancement, or if the appointee is unresponsive to departmental requests to submit updated file materials. For appointees subject to APM 137, Non-Senate Appointees/Term Appointment, the department may allow the appointment to expire instead of recommending a no-change action.
If the appointee has an off-scale salary, its disposition should be discussed in the departmental letter. For instance, if a market off-scale salary is due to be rejustified at the time of a no-change action, and no argument is included in the file to reset the market off-scale salary, the letter should state that the market off-scale salary will be tapered in accordance with PPM 230-28 VII.B.5.
After a no-change action takes effect, the appointee's review cycle will be reset for the normal two-, three-, or four-year cycle. Should the department propose advancement prior to the end of the appointee's normal review cycle, this action will not be considered an acceleration.