Unclassified Professional Staff (UPS) Performance Evaluation Appeal Process
To outline the process used by Unclassified Professional Staff (UPS) to appeal an overall rating of unsatisfactory on a performance evaluation.
Unclassified Professional Staff (UPS) with active appointments to regular positions who are not serving on probationary status.
An Unclassified Professional Staff may discuss a performance evaluation with the supervisor and/or file a formal appeal if the evaluation resulted in an overall rating of unsatisfactory.
Employees may elect to contact Human Resource Management (HRM) and/or the University Ombudsman for information about any step of the appeal process. HRM is also available to advise employees or supervisors about performance expectation standards, and/or goal setting processes.
Discussion with Supervisor
An Unclassified Professional Staff employee who disagrees with an evaluation is strongly encouraged to discuss the disagreement(s) with the supervisor before pursuing a formal appeal. HRM may be consulted by either party for facilitation services.
The supervisor should document the employee’s concerns during the discussion meeting. In the event that an amicable decision is reached, and a change has been agreed upon, the change may be made to the pertinent section(s) and/or rating(s) of the electronic evaluation. Such changes may or may not impact the overall rating of the evaluation. Ultimately, however, it is within the supervisor’s authority to determine the final content of the evaluation after the discussion with the employee.
In the event the employee desires to initiate an appeal of an evaluation with an overall rating of unsatisfactory, the employee must submit a formal written evaluation appeal.
Evaluation Appeal
An Unclassified Professional Staff employee who desires to appeal a performance evaluation resulting in an overall unsatisfactory rating without or after supervisory discussion, must submit a written appeal to the Director of unit, Dean, Vice Provost, Vice Chancellor, or Provost (or designee) within ten working days of receiving the completed performance evaluation review. The employee’s appeal should include specific information about the performance areas where there is disagreement, documentation and/or examples of the employee’s performance in the defined areas (for the time period evaluated), and the desired outcome of the appeal.
The employee and the appropriate administrator designated by the unit head will meet within five working days after receipt of the written appeal to discuss the employee’s concerns. The evaluation review period may be extended by the appropriate administrator with the changed deadlines related to the appeal communicated to the employee.
Upon conclusion of the appeal review, the appropriate administrator will respond to the employee in writing within ten working days regarding the decision. In the event any portion of the evaluation is changed, the employee will be provided a revised electronic evaluation. The evaluation will be retained in the University’s official evaluation system of record. Final decisions made by the designated administrator are not subject to further appeal.
While the unsatisfactory performance evaluation may be appealed, the actual compensation decision in regard to merit cannot be appealed.
Employees who believe that they have been discriminated against on the basis of race, color, ethnicity, religion, sex, national origin, age, ancestry, disability, status as a veteran, sexual orientation, marital status, parental status, gender identity, gender expression, and genetic information with respect to rendering a job performance evaluation should contact the Office of Civil Rights & Title IX at 785-864-8414.
Department of Human Resource Management
103 Carruth-O’Leary Hall
1246 W. Campus Road
Lawrence, KS 66045
785-864-4946
hrdept@ku.edu
A statement on appeals of performance evaluations was included in the policies and procedures for unclassified professional staff that were approved by the Chancellor in 1979, revised 1994, 1995, and 1996. These policies and procedures were Section C.4 of the 1998 Handbook for Faculty and Other Unclassified Staff; evaluation procedures were described in C.4.f.
This policy, approved on February 18, 2010, supersedes that statement.
09/01/2021: Updated IOA to Office of Civil Rights & Title IX.
06/15/2017: Policy updated to make reference to new performance management system.
07/20/2016: Updated to remove gendered pronouns.
06/21/2016: Updated DLR
01/21/2015: Policy formatting cleanup (e.g., bolding, spacing).
02/18/2010: This policy was approved; it supersedes the previous statement included in Section C.4 of the Handbook.
1998: These policies and procedures were Section C.4 of the 1998 Handbook for Faculty and Other Unclassified Staff; evaluation procedures were described in C.4.f.
1996: The statement on appeals of performance evaluation included in the policies and procedures for unclassified professional staff was revised.
1995: The statement on appeals of performance evaluation included in the policies and procedures for unclassified professional staff was revised.
1994: The statement on appeals of performance evaluation included in the policies and procedures for unclassified professional staff was revised.
1979: A statement on appeals of performance evaluations was included in the policies and procedures for unclassified professional staff that were approved by the Chancellor.
