The annual reviews for FY27 (26-27) are due on or before April 24, 2026.

Performance reviews can be called evaluations or appraisals. The review is the process of assessing an employee's performance for a review cycle (probationary first six months of employment, annually, etc.). The form is a document that managers use to evaluate performance.

For the annual review process, employees should fill out a self-assessment form first. These forms list the accomplishments or any obstacles that the employee had.

New employees that start on or after January 1, 2026 and after will be excluded from the annual review process, but should have a probationary review completed by their supervisor and reviewed with the employee.

No, researchers will not be evaluated at this time.

No, only academic staff will be evaluated.

The performance review has purposes other than determining increases in pay. It is an opportunity to discuss and document feedback on an individual’s performance, to confirm goals and priorities, and it serves as a guideline for each employee’s own professional development. It is a good forum to open up the discussion between employee and supervisor about how an individual can be most effective in his or her current role and clarify expectations as well as prepare for future growth in the position.  This is also a good opportunity to discuss the Code of Conduct and Mission and ensure alignment on both.

The current manager should conduct the evaluation with input from the previous manager (if still employed). Input from past managers is relevant to the entire assessment. However, if the change was very recent, it might be appropriate for the previous manager to conduct the evaluation. There is no right or wrong approach.

If a employee has a less than "meets expectations" scores on performance review then please reach out to a member of the Employee Relations Team in The Office of Human Resources to guide you in next steps to addressing performance properly.   

A general guideline is if the employee receives three or more "does not meet expectations" scores on the review that would trigger the development of a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) which the Employee Relations team is ready to support supervisors in developing and issuing.   Is it also important to provide concrete examples with dates and objective written feedback to concretely demonstrate where the employee is falling short on both the performance review and the PIP.

Faculty, Deans, Chairs, researchers, temps, contractors,  and staff that have started on July 1, 2025 or after.