Long Form Clinic 101

1. Long Form Clinic 101 January 2004 Department of Medicine Written by: Annelies Ashoff Ransome & Scott Walters

2. Review and Approval Process for Long Forms

3. MCL vs. UTL vs. NTLR MCL = Annelies • Focus: clinical care, teaching, scholarship (including clinical research) and institutional service UTL = Scott • Focus: Scholarship (research), teaching and clinical care NTLR = Scott • Focus: Scholarship (research) and teaching

4. Who Does What? • Division Faculty Affairs Staff Member • Liaison with Department Faculty Affairs • Coordinates referee grid • Works with candidate on developing CV • Solicits evaluation letters and tracks evaluator responses • Gathers teaching and clinical evaluations for all faculty, as well as transcripts for new Assistant Professors • Provides Source of Salary Support (SOSS) form for new appointments and promotions • Collects, organizes and keeps current all portions of the long form

5. Who Does What? Cont… • Candidate • Works with Division faculty affairs to develop and update CV • Keeps Division apprised of any changes, updates, or new developments • Writes “Candidate’s Statement” portion of long form (all actions except initial appointment at Assistant Professor rank) • Works with Division Chief on list of potential evaluators and trainee evaluators • May write “Current Work” section of “Scholarship” on long form • Provides five articles, noting favorite, for reappointments or promotions to Associate and full Professor levels • Provides answers to questions raised during review process

6. Who Does What? Cont… • Division Chief • Critically reviews CV, especially publications • Oversees long form process or appoints a senior faculty member to oversee process • Selects Evaluators and writes solicitation letter • Writes narrative portions of long form • Cover Memo • Scholarship (Note: “Current Work” section may be written by candidate) • Teaching • Clinical • Other Activities • Evaluation of Candidate • Evaluation Process • Draft Counseling Memo

7. Who Does What? Cont… • Department of Medicine Faculty Affairs • Knowledge source for all Faculty Affairs information • Liaison for Divisions, Chair, Departmental Committees and School of Medicine Faculty Affairs • Manages long forms through entire review process • Critically reviews and edits long forms, and works with Division and School to address revisions/questions • Advises Divisions of upcoming Appointments and Promotions actions • Arranges Chair, A&P and DOM Executive Committee review of long forms

8. Who Does What? Cont… • Department Chair (Dr. Horwitz) and Vice Chair for Faculty Affairs (Dr. Hoffman) • Works directly with division chiefs, department’s A&P committee and candidates on A&P matters • Works with Division Chief to craft cover memo • Critically reviews all referee grids, solicitation letters, and long forms • Signs off on final draft of long form • Presents long form at SOM A&P committee and SOM executive committee

9. Who Does What? Cont… • Department A&P Committee • Critically reviews all long forms • Primary and secondary reviewers read and present long form • Votes on all files • Recommends revisions and requests additional information as needed • Advises Department Chair and Division Chief of committee’s findings

10. Who Does What? Cont… • DOM Executive Committee (Previously “Division Chiefs”) • Reviews CVs and cover memo for all long forms • Primary and secondary reviewers read and present long form • Votes on all files • Recommends revisions and requests additional information as needed

11. Letter Gathering Process

12. Referee Grid • Use SOM referee grid template found at: http://www.med.stanford.edu/academicaffairs/handbook/forms/Referee_Grid.doc • Selecting Referees • See checklist for required number of referees, do not exceed required number • Academic rank of each referee must be greater or equal to proposed rank of candidate • Qualification of each referee to evaluate the candidate must be given • Strike a balance between mentors/collaborators and professional colleagues

13. Referee Grid (Cont.) • Referees are to be selected by the Division Chief; no more than half of the referees can be suggested by candidate – any suggested by candidate should be marked with an asterisk (*) on the referee grid • Submitting Referee Grids • Very important -- Letters cannot be solicited until the referee grid is officially approved by the Dean’s Office. • Referee lists are submitted electronically with the candidate’s CV to DOM Faculty Affairs (MCL=Annelies; UTL & NTLR=Scott). • The grids must first be approved by the Department Chair, then by SOM.

14. Solicitation Letters for Approved Referee Grid • Soliciting Evaluation Letters • In creating solicitation letters, you must use the sample letter formatting found at: http://www.med.stanford.edu/academicaffairs/handbook/chapt2.2.html#2.81 • Criteria for each individual line can be found at: http://www.med.stanford.edu/academicaffairs/handbook/ • Once you have received approval from the SOM via DOM for your referee grid and had your solicitation letter approved by DOM Chair, you may begin soliciting evaluation letters. • UPDATE - although the SOM’s forms ask for a reply from the referee in two weeks, the DOM prefers that you give the referee a more realistic one month to reply. • It is important to note that the School of Medicine has requested that we only use the term “evaluation letter,” not “recommendation letter,” in all of our work with the referees because we are seeking a true evaluation of the candidate (versus the possible perception of wanting only positive recommendations of the candidate).

15. Proper Evaluation Letter Solicitation and Follow-up Procedures • Very important to track the dates of each and every follow-up letter or email. • It is OK to simply resend the original letter with “Second Request” written at the top of the photocopied letter, • You must make two follow-up requests • Any email follow-up must be objective, fact based communication, preferably the letter that was sent out pasted into the body of an email. • One cannot make a phone call or send an email that states that the referee’s lack of action will effect the candidate’s appointment or promotion, nor can one request a “recommendation” as that infers a desire for only positive evaluations of the candidate • Reminder – the candidate cannot be involved with this process; we assure referees that their letters are confidential.

16. Long Form Section by Section

17. Long Forms – Section by Section • Cover Memo • Face Page • CV and Bibliography • Candidate’s Statement (except for new appointments) • Evaluation Process or Search Process • Scholarship • Teaching • Clinical Activities • Other Activities • Evaluation of Candidate • Draft Counseling Memo • Departmental and School Approval • Source of Salary Support Form (SOSS) for new appointments and promotions only

18. Cover Memo • Written by Division Chief • Dr. Swain’s memo outlines requirements (see file titled “Swain Cover Memo”) • Cover Memo Subheadings: • 1st paragraph: General information • 2nd paragraph: Search Process • 3rd paragraph: Candidate’s CV • 4th paragraph: Referee Letters • 5th paragraph: Summary of scholarship • 6th paragraph: Summary of teaching • 7th paragraph: Summary of patient care • 8th paragraph: Summary of administrative/leadership • 9th paragraph: Summary of review process • 10th paragraph: Short summary of final recommendation • Amended as needed following Departmental reviews

19. Face Page • Fill in blanks except for dates of appointment and signatures • Be sure to include Billet # and People Soft # • Secondary Department line applicable only for joint or courtesy appointments • All appointments are “Not Coterminus” unless you are instructed otherwise by Department Faculty Affairs

20. CV and Bibliography • Follow outline in Long Form template (using letter and number outline, and indent for easy reading) • Notify Department Faculty Affairs of updates to CV throughout long form process up until final approval by Provost

21. CV and Bibliography (Cont.) Notes on Specific Sections of CV: • Section A – Identifying Information • Ethnicity – follow Stanford’s Affirmative Action ethnicity categories, e.g., use “white” instead of “Caucasian”

22. CV and Bibliography (Cont.) • Section B – Academic History • PhD and Master’s theses should be listed here in B1, not in bibliography • “Scholarships and Honors” should include only work done prior to attaining highest degree • Post-degree honors go in Section E

23. CV and Bibliography (Cont.) • Section C – Employment History • All Stanford academic appointments must have full start and end dates (month, day and year) • Section D – Public and Professional Service • Section E – Post-Degree Honors and Awards • Include grants and clinical trials here separated into current and past • Must include sponsor, dates, title and candidate's role (if not PI, identify PI) • Do not list $ amounts of grants!

24. CV and Bibliography (Cont.) • Section F – Bibliography • “Peer-Reviewed Articles” must be reviewed by the Division Chief to ensure all are peer-reviewed • For MCL candidates – must separate this section into “original research” and “other” (Division Chief will do this) • List all articles published, in press or submitted (do not list articles in preparation) • For articles in press or submitted, must list month and year submitted. • Keep up-to-date throughout process

25. CV and Bibliography (Cont.) • Section F – Bibliography (cont.) • Formatting – Italicize names of journals, underline titles of books, commas go within “quotation marks,” and bold candidate’s name in every citation • Additional work, i.e., websites or videos, may be included as additional numbered items of Section F

26. Candidate’s Statement • Not applicable for new appointments • Advise candidates to write in lay person’s language (must be understood by non-scientists), and restrict to no more than three pages. • Should be in first person • Text in candidate’s statement should not be cut and pasted in other sections

27. Evaluation or Search Process • Evaluation Process (reappointments and promotions only) • Include list of evaluation committee members, dates of meetings, what was decided at each meeting, who reviewed the letters and other materials gathered for the long form before forwarding to Department for review • Do not include comments regarding accomplishments or suitability of candidate (these belong in the “Evaluation of Candidate” section)

28. Evaluation or Search Process (Cont.) • Search Process (new appointments only) • Insert Search Report here without CV or Social Security Number • UTL: See Swain memo on search process within the department, report must detail how this was followed. • NOTE: The Department Chair has requested that, instead of splitting the search report into two sections, the search report be included intact

29. Scholarship • Section A • NOTE – requirements for this section have recently changed! • New Requirement – provide longer general introduction summarizing candidate’s type, goals and results of candidate’s scholarly work followed by brief reviews of two significant publications • If candidate is not first or senior author, describe candidate’s role • Do not use publications reviewed in candidate’s previous long forms • Should be written in lay person’s language • Must be written by Division Chief or designated expert • List “Written by…” at the end of narrative

30. Scholarship (Cont.) • Section B – Current Work • May be written by candidate (include “Written by…” at end of narrative) • Must be written in lay person’s language

31. Teaching • Written by Division Chief • Do not include evaluative comments; section should be a summary of all teaching activities • Include an “executive summary” of teaching evaluation scores and comments, and compare findings to other faculty within division • Include any/all teaching evaluations with comments in summary form (do not include individual evaluations) • For new appointments, contact candidate’s previous institution to obtain teaching evaluations

32. Clinical Activities • Again, do not include evaluative comments in this section; describe expected clinical duties • Use “Evaluation of Clinical Excellence” form found at http://www.med.stanford.edu/academicaffairs/handbook/forms/2.76.doc • Distribute to as many people as possible who know the candidate’s clinical work • For NTLR this section does not exist, but for those NTLR faculty who do clinical work include such information and evaluations in the “Other Activities” section

33. Other Activities • Include activities that fall outside the scope of expected faculty duties for their line • Include collaborations with other departments or schools • For NTLR include any clinical work • Include administrative duties

34. Evaluation of Candidate • This should be an evaluative summary of the candidate’s scholarly, teaching, clinical and other activities. • While there may be overlap, please do not cut and paste from the transmittal memo • For new appointments, include the evaluation of candidate and also refer reader to search process section for description of definitive pool candidates

35. Draft Counseling Memo • Written to candidate from Division Chief • Differs from annual review! • Must be based on materials received in preparation of long form and updated to include comments from review committees as needed • Should provide brief but specific guidance to candidate about career trajectory and future plans • Cannot cut and paste from cover memo • NOTE: Will remain in draft form until after final provost approval, at which time it will be presented to and signed by candidate to be included in candidate’s university file.

36. Departmental and School Approval • To be filled out by Department Faculty Affairs Administrators 

37. Source of Salary Support (SOSS) • For new candidates or promotions • Submitted with long form • Completed by Division Manager with assistance from DFA • Form can be found at: http://www.med.stanford.edu/academicaffairs/handbook/forms/2.80.doc

38. Long Form Timeline

39. Timeline • May be helpful to think in terms of a six month timeline, but long forms can be done faster • Maximum length of time for this process should be nine months • Shortest time from search report approval to long form’s final approval was 2.5 months (it can be done!)

40. Timeline (Month 1) • Division notified a minimum of 12 months prior to candidate's appointment expiration or search report approved • Obtain current candidate CV • Division Evaluation Committee meets 12 months prior to candidate’s appointment expiration date to determine course of action • Create referee grid and solicitation letter

41. Timeline (Month 1, cont.) • Solicit evaluation letters (once you have full approval) • Gather teaching and clinical evaluations • Edit CV following long form outline • Division Chief and Candidate begin narrative portions of long form

42. Timeline (Month 2) • Follow-up on any delinquent evaluation letters (keeping careful notes of any/all communication) • Candidate chooses five favorite articles, and identifies favorite of the five. (Note: not applicable for Assistant Professors) • Long form portions assembled into a complete first draft and submitted to Department Faculty Affairs for initial review

43. Timeline (Month 3) • Department Faculty Affairs receives first draft of long form no later than 6 months prior to candidate’s expiration date for initial review • Department Faculty Affairs works with Division Faculty Affairs on first round of editing • When file is determined to be ready, Department Faculty Affairs sends long form to DOM A&P and Division Chiefs • Final edits following departmental meetings done by Division

44. Timeline (Month 4) • Long form submitted to SOM Faculty Affairs for initial review • Department Faculty Affairs works with Division Faculty Affairs on edits from SOM • Polished long form submitted to SOM for review process

45. Timeline (Months 5-6) • 2 to 2.5 months for SOM and University approval processes • In calculating your overall timeline, please be sure to add one week for each university holiday or closure.

46. Timeline (Month 6) • Long Form Approved!

47. Questions? • Depending on your division either contact Gretchen, ext. 6-1440 gpicache@stanford.edu or Maryam, Ext. 1-1175 maryame1@stanford.edu