Date:

April 28, 2009

To:

Principals / Deans / Reviewing Managers; Advancement Professionals; (CC: David Palmer, Rivi Frankle, Gillian Morrison, Barbara Dick, Deborah Ovsenny, Deborah Simon Edwards, Divisional HR Offices

From:

Angela Hildyard, Vice President, Human Resources & Equity and Chair of Advancement Compensation Committee

Re:

Advancement Professionals 2009 Annual Performance Assessment Process

It is now time to begin the annual performance process for Advancement Professionals. Performance assessment is an opportunity for you to recognize accomplishments, clarify expectations, focus on priorities, and discuss opportunities for development. We know from the employee survey that employees want to receive meaningful feedback and they value this opportunity to discuss career development. Please take the time to engage positively with your staff in this process.

Given the University’s current budgetary situation and the fact that we are still actively engaged in bargaining with several employee groups, no decision has been made yet regarding compensation increases for Advancement Professionals, Professional/Managerial and Confidential staff in 2009. We will inform you once a decision has been made. In the meantime, reviewers should proceed with the performance assessment process in order to provide staff with critical feedback on their performance and accomplishments throughout this past year.

This memorandum contains detailed instructions on the Performance Assessment process for Advancement Professionals. Please review the memorandum – it outlines some important changes and it notes critical dates.

Any questions concerning the Performance Assessment Tool and Process may be directed to your Divisional HR Office.

Complete details on the Advancement Professionals Compensation Policy are available athttps://people.utoronto.ca/Assets/comp/ap/apcompol09.pdf

Section 1: What’s New

Base Increase Recommendations

For this year’s process, managers will continue to recommend an overall performance rating for staff, but are no longer required to recommend a base increase or complete a separate memo to the Advancement Compensation Committee. Instead managers will indicate their recommended overall performance rating on the Summary Assessment Form.

Assessment of Competencies

Enhancements have been made to the Competency Section of the assessment forms. This section has been broken into three parts: Core Values, Leadership Qualities and Competencies. The addition of Equity/Diversity/Inclusivity and Accountability/Business Integrity as “core values” aligns the AP Competencies with those used for Professional/Managerial staff. These are values that are expected of all staff. Reviewers are asked to indicate whether the staff member has met the described expectations in these two areas.

The Leadership Qualities and Competencies sections for the most part have taken existing competencies used in past years and have streamlined the language. For example the Staff Leadership & Development competency reflects a blending of the past Leadership and Staff Development competencies, aligning it with those used for Professional/Managerial staff.

Two new competencies Personal Leadership & External Relations Orientation have been developed to focus attention on the specific strategic work of Advancement Professionals. Reviewers are asked to assess staff on the competencies using the Performance Rating Descriptors outlined in Section 4 of this document.

2009/2010 Accountability Process

This process is currently under review. Details to follow.

Section 2 – Critical Dates Overview

April – May 15	All Advancement Professionals to complete their 2008-2009 Performance Accountability contracts. SDO’s are to incorporate required data sent week of May 11th from DUA. AP staff member to email the Performance Accountability contract directly to their manager with a copy to Deborah Simon Edwards by May 15, 2009.
May 19 – June 9	Manager receives completed AP Performance Accountability contract from AP staff members (by May 15). Manager reflects on feedback and coaching discussions that occurred with AP staff members throughout the review period. Manager completes the Summary Assessment Form.
May 19 – June 9	Phone meetings to take place between DUA and Principals/Deans for SDO Advancement Professionals where there is a direct reporting relationship to a Dean/Principal.
June 10	Manager submits the completed Summary Assessment Form which includes a recommended overall rating to theirDivisional HR Office by June 10. The Advancement Compensation Committee must review all recommendations beforeany discussion with AP staff members take place. All managers are to follow their Faculty’s/Division’s approval process prior to submitting their recommendations to the committee.Please note, if you work in DUA, please submit these documents to Deborah Simon Edwards.
June 16	ACC Review Meeting
June 25	Compensation to send approved performance ratings to Divisional HR Offices for distribution to Managers.
June 25 – July 24	Manager conducts performance discussions and confirms ratings with AP staff members. Reviewer provides AP staff member with a copy of the Summary Assessment Form. (Employees can provide Reviewers with comments in writing about their final assessment). Final signed copies are to be placed in the employee’s personnel file.

Section 3 – 2008/2009 Performance Accountability Contracts and Performance Reviews

Advancement Professional Staff Members

All Advancement Professional are required to complete the results and variance sections of their 2008/2009 contracts and email the completed contract directly to their Dean/Principal/Manager and Deborah Simon Edwards no later than Friday, May 15, 2009.

In completing sections A and B of the performance/accountability contract, staff should include documented actual results, variances (where applicable) and actual completion dates. SDO’s can expect to receive year-end DIS results from Alex Agostino via email the week of May 11th, 2009 to incorporate in their contracts.

Prior to conducting the performance review, managers will review completed contracts and will complete a Summary Assessment Form which will form the basis of the performance review discussion.

Performance reviews should be scheduled sometime between June 25 – July 24. Work with your managers to book these meetings. Managers will provide a copy of the Completed Summary Assessment Form in July.

Managers of Advancement Professional Staff

Advancement Professionals will be submitting their completed 2008-2009 contracts directly to their managers by Friday, May 15, 2009. As in past years, the performance review process allows for the Advancement Compensation Committee to approve recommended performance ratings prior to Performance Review meetings with staff members.

Reviewing Performance

Managers of Advancement Professionals are to review the contract and complete the Summary Assessment Form prior to the performance review meeting. The manager will use this information to form the basis for the discussion about performance with the staff member. Copies of the Summary Assessment Forms are available athttps://people.utoronto.ca/groups/pm/ap.htm.

In completing section A of the Performance/Accountability contract, the staff member should include documented actual results, variance (when applicable), and actual completion dates. This information

is to assist the manager in obtaining a clear understanding of performance and any variances listed in the contract.

Section A of the contract provides an opportunity for quantitative evaluation. When reviewing this section the manager should consider if the staff member has in fact achieved the objectives set out. Were financial targets met? Were projects completed on time according to agreed upon specifications?

Note that comments about section A can be placed on the Summary Assessment Form, managers can dispute or amplify the actual results reported by the staff member.

The question of how well someone achieved objectives is addressed in the Summary Assessment Form in the Rating of General Competencies section. Ask yourself “What was the quality of performance?” The competencies consider the overall quality of the staff member’s performance. For example, if targets were met, but the overall management of the unit and its resources was poor, the assessment of the staff member’s competency in “interpersonal/ teamwork” and “leadership” might be lower.

The variance column in section A allows for explanation of the difference between a stated objective and the actual results, be it a change in priorities, lack of funding etc. Managers should closely examine instances of variance and confirm or elaborate on the reasons for variance in the comment section of the Summary Assessment Form.

Manager’s comments are useful to both the employee, as feedback, and to the Advancement Compensation Committee, as a source of insight into evaluations.

Managers are to send copies of the completed Summary Assessment Form to their Divisional HR Office or to Deborah Simon Edward for DUA staff, by June 10, 2009. The Divisional HR Office will forward these documents to the Advancement Compensation Committee via Compensation.

Please ensure to follow your own Faculty’s/ Division’s particular approval process prior to submitting recommendations to the committee.

This rating SHOULD NOT be discussed with your staff member, as overall ratings are not final until the Advancement Compensation Committee has reviewed and approved them.

The Advancement Compensation Committee will compare the evaluations of Advancement Professionals across the University before approving final ratings. Managers will receive confirmation of the rating after June 25th, 2009 through their Divisional HR Office.

Note: 1 and 2 AP SDO’s

To facilitate the evaluation of some 1 and 2 AP SDO’s who report directly to a Dean/Principal a phone meeting will be scheduled with DUA and the Dean/Principal to jointly evaluate the Advancement Professional’s contract and to arrive at a recommended performance rating. DUA will also assist in completing the Summary Assessment Form. Deans/Principals will be contacted directly by DUA.

Section 4 – Performance Rating Descriptors

In completing the Summary Assessment Form please refer to the following definitions of performance:

PERFORMANCE CATEGORY	DESCRIPTION	PERFORMANCE RATING
Exceptional Performance	Consistently and substantially exceeded goals, objectives and expectations through outstanding achievements in all aspects of the position. This category is reserved for employees who demonstrate exceptional performance of a consistently and distinctly superior level of quality in all areas of responsibility and make significant contributions to the Division/Department and/or University. Those who receive this rating must consistently and substantially exceed all goals as a direct result of concerted effort.	5
Excellent Performance	Consistently achieved and frequently exceeded job expectations, goals and objectives through concerted effort, according to plan. Demonstrated performance of a very high level of quality in all areas of responsibility.	4
High Quality Performance	Work is of good quality in all significant areas of responsibility. Met job expectations, goals and objectives – both qualitative and quantitative. Consistently achieved performance expectations.	3
Partially Achieving Performance Expectations	Partially achieved some quantitative and qualitative goals and objectives; improvement is needed: It is expected that the employee will work to fulfill job expectations in a reasonable period of time – not to exceed one year.	2
Unsatisfactory Performance	Did not meet a majority of the goals and objectives. Improvement is needed in most aspects of the job. It is unclear if the employee can develop to the point where all job expectations are met. Immediate action must be taken as a result of this assessment.	1

Section 5 – The Performance Review Meeting

All Performance Review meetings should take place between June 25 and July 24.

The completed Summary Assessment Form should be used to form the basis of the discussion for the Performance Review meeting. Managers should also communicate the approved performance rating.

Employees are encouraged to provide comments in writing about the assessment after the Performance Review meeting.

Faculty / Division	HR Contact	Contact Information
Division of University Advancement	Rebecca Ko Deborah Simon Edwards	Rebecca.ko@utoronto.ca – 978-5468Deborah.simon.edwards@utoronto.ca – 978-5076
Faculty of Applied Science & Engineering	Emma Scully	Emma.scully@utoronto.ca – 978-8453
Faculty of Arts & Science	Carol Robb	Carol.robb@utoronto.ca – 946-5182
Faculty of Dentistry	Alison Mahoney	alison.mahoney@utoronto.ca 979-4900 ext 4388
Faculty of Law	Kathleen Slater	kslater@oise.utoronto.ca – 978-1313
Faculty of Management	Jan Kloosterhuis	Jan.kloosterhuis@rotman.utoronto.ca – 946-7331
Faculty of Medicine	Diana Tiernan	Diana.tiernan@utoronto.ca – 978-1196
Faculty of Music	Kathleen Slater	kslater@oise.utoronto.ca – 978-1313
Faculty of Nursing	Emma Scully	Emma.scully@utoronto.ca – 978-8453
Faculty of Pharmacy	Emma Scully	Emma.scully@utoronto.ca – 978-8453
Faculty of Physical Education and Health	Emma Scully	Emma.scully@utoronto.ca – 978-8453
Faculty of Social Work	Kathleen Slater	kslater@oise.utoronto.ca – 978-1313
Innis College	Rebecca Ko	Rebecca.ko@utoronto.ca – 978-5468
New College	Rebecca Ko	Rebecca.ko@utoronto.ca – 978-5468
University College	Rebecca Ko	Rebecca.ko@utoronto.ca – 978-5468
Woodsworth College	Rebecca Ko	Rebecca.ko@utoronto.ca – 978-5468
OISE	Kathleen Slater	kslater@oise.utoronto.ca – 978-1313
University of Toronto at Mississauga	Lynda Collins	Lynda.collins@utoronto.ca – 828-5210