Appointments in this series are made in the cases of academically qualified individuals whose predominant responsibilities are in clinical teaching and patient care, and who hold compensated positions in the School of Medicine, School of Dentistry or an affiliated or associated hospital or other institution. For appointment and advancement in this series primary emphasis is placed upon the individual’s clinical teaching and achievement, and professional competence and activity. In addition it is expected that appointees will contribute creatively to administrative, academic or research activities in the department or the school, and will participate in University and public service. See Appendix 8 for "Instructions to Review and Appraisal Committees for the Clinical Professor (Compensated) Series" regarding personnel actions in this series.

All appointments and reappointments of individuals who have clinical teaching and patient-care responsibilities which before September 1, 1986, would have been made in the Adjunct Professor series shall, on and after September 1, 1986, be made in the Clinical Professor (Compensated) series. Individuals with such responsibilities who on August 31, 1986, held appointments in the Adjunct Professor series, at their option were transferred to the Clinical Professor (Compensated) series at the time of their next personnel actions. Individuals who remained in the Adjunct Professor Series after September 1, 1986, continue to have the option to change series upon request.

The policies and procedures which follow apply also to the before-mentioned appointments in the Adjunct Professor series of individuals who have clinical teaching and patient-care responsibilities.

1. All appointments, reappointments and renewals of appointment at any rank (hereinafter referred to collectively as an appointment) must have a specified ending date. The maximum term of an appointment is:

2. When extending an offer to individuals in this series, it is necessary for the Dean or Chair to include the following statement in any correspondence regarding their offer of an appointment or renewal of appointment:

"This appointment is for a specific term, with an ending date as herein set forth, and is not for a longer period unless express written notification is so given to the appointee. In the absence of such express notification, the appointment ipso facto terminates on the specified ending date."

An appointee in this series must hold a compensated appointment in the University or in an affiliated or associated institution and must be a member of an approved compensation plan in the University, or the equivalent in an affiliated or associated institution.

Without salary appointments with or without step, may be made when the appointee serves at an affiliated or associated hospital or other institution. A without salary appointment may be made without step when, because of the nature of the responsibilities of the appointee, there will likely be no need for regularly scheduled appraisal or review for advancement.

Tenure or Security of Employment is not granted in association with appointment to this series.

E. Limit on Service

* An Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated) who has completed eight years of service in that title, or in that title in combination with other titles as established by the President, shall not be continued after the eighth year unless promoted to Associate Clinical Professor (Compensated) or Clinical Professor (Compensated). See Appendix 14 for "Guide to the Computation of Years of Service Which Count Toward the Eight-Year Limit."

Appointments in the Clinical Professor (Compensated) Series must be funded from extramural sources for at least 50% of total University service. The requisite effort and time must be devoted to each extramural source which provides compensation for service rendered under a title in this series.

When an appointment in any title in this series is supported by General Funds for 51% or more, the total period of such appointment, either alone or in combination with prior appointments in the Professor-in-Residence series, Adjunct Professor series, and Professor of Clinical (X) series and, shall not exceed eight years. In other words, there is a cumulative Eight-Year Limit on State Funding in the Professor-in-Residence series, Adjunct Professor series, Professor of Clinical (X) series and Clinical Professor (Compensated) series.

The Chancellor may, under justifying circumstances, approve funding of 51% or more of the base salary from General Funds for the Clinical Professor (Compensated) series, for a limited period.

It is the responsibility of each Department Chair (in cooperation with any employing Principal Investigator or Director) to assure that each appointee to this series is at all times aware of the financial longevity of the source(s) of support for the appointment.

Note: Departmental provisions for Teaching Assistants, Professional Research—, Postgraduate Research—, and Research Assistants may not be used to support appointments to this series.

Appointment to this series does not confer membership in the Academic Senate.

An individual who holds a salaried University appointment to this series is compensated on the salary scales established for the Health Sciences. Compensation at an Off-Scale salary rate may be approved by the Chancellor or, upon specific delegation, by the Dean. An appointee in this series shall be a member of an approved compensation plan in the University or the equivalent in an affiliated hospital.

Deans not serving as Chair have Off-Scale approval authority up to and including the next step. All Off-Scale rates must be in multiples of $100. For all other Off-Scale salary up to the Regental threshold the Chancellor is the final approval authority. Salaries exceeding this threshold require Regental approval (refer to annually published UC Salary Scales for Regental thresholds). See Appendix 17 for "Summary of UCLA Policy on Off-Scale Salaries."

The Chancellor has the authority to approve Above-Scale salaries up to the Regental threshold (refer to annually published UC Salary Scales for Regental thresholds). Approval of salaries beyond this approval authority require Regental action.

IV. Employment

Please see Appendix 22, "Summary of Recruitment Policy" and Appendix 23, "Faculty Search Guidelines" regarding search requirements and required documentation.

Criteria for assessment of individual qualification are set forth in Appendix 8, "Instructions to Review and Appraisal Committees for the Clinical Professor (Compensated) Series" except that in applying these criteria in cases involving individuals in the rank of Assistant Professor, due consideration must, of course, be given the individual’s promise, as well as achievement, in creative activities.

When review for renewal coincides with a required appraisal or a merit increase or both, a single, combined dossier should be submitted. Such a dossier is subject to review, approval authority policies and procedural requirements for (a) appraisal if appraisal is required or (b) merit increase if appraisal is not required.

Employment encompasses the following types of personnel actions:

1. Appointment

Initial employment in the series or permanent intercampus transfer. Review and submission of a dossier are required for appointment.

2. Re-employment

Appointment in the same series after a previous separation. Review and submission of dossier are required.

3. Renewal of Appointment/Reappointment

Appointment immediately following the ending date of a self-terminating appointment in this series. Review and submission of dossier is not required, provided there is no change in rank or step.

4. Change in Series

Transfer to another academic series. Review and submission of a dossier are required. See Appendix 26 for dossier content and search requirements.

5. Change of Department

Transfer from one department to another. Review and submission of dossier are required.

6. Split Appointment

Salaried appointments where the faculty position is divided between two or more departments. Review and submission of a dossier are required. Also see Appendix 15 for policies governing Interdepartmental Degree Programs and Centers for Interdisciplinary Instruction.

7. Joint Appointment

Appointment to an additional department on a without salary basis where the faculty position remains based in the home department. Review and submission of dossier are required. Please see Appendix 15, "Joint and Split Appointments" for instructions regarding secondary department participation in subsequent reviews.

8. Temporary Appointments

Appointments made on a year-to-year basis to academic administrative positions or to temporary research positions require no dossier.

9. Informal Extra-Departmental Affiliations

An informal relationship (not a Joint or Split Appointment) with an Organized Research Unit, research center, or interdepartmental teaching program, within the University for the purposes of advising or conducting research. An evaluation of the appointee’s contribution to that program should be submitted in all actions requiring a dossier.  Also see Appendix 37 for Interdisciplinary Activity.

D. Effective Dates of Personnel Actions

The effective date of an appointment is the first day on which payment begins. The effective date for Fiscal-Year appointees will always coincide with the first day of service.

1. Appointment, Re-employment and Change in Series

2. Renewal of Appointment/Reappointment

When renewal of a self-terminating appointment in this series coincides with a required appraisal, a merit increase, or promotion, a dossier is to be submitted. Such a dossier is subject to the review, approval authority policies and procedural requirements governing that action

3. Change of Department and Split Appointment

4. Joint Appointment (WOS Appointments)

Authority to approve or deny recommendations rests at the indicated administrative levels.

For Fiscal Year appointees, employment actions approved by the Dean more than 6 months after the effective date of the appointment requires Chancellor’s approval for the retroactivity.

1. Appointment, Re-employment and Change in Series

* provided that there is no change in rank and step

3. Change of Department and Split Appointment

Dentistry, Law and Nursing

Arts and Architecture, Education and Information Studies, Engineering and Applied Science, Letters and Science, Management, Medicine, Public Health, Public Policy and Social Research, and Theater, Film & Television

4. Joint Appointment (WOS Appointments)

Dentistry, Law and Nursing

Arts and Architecture, Education and Information Studies, Engineering and Applied Science, Letters and Science, Management, Medicine, Public Health, Public Policy and Social Research, and Theater, Film & Television

The following restrictions govern all employment:

1. any action involving employment of near relatives (see Appendix 21, "Employment of Near Relatives"), requires approval of the Chancellor;
2. compliance with recruitment and search requirements; and
3. any exception to policy governing the series requires advance approval of the Chancellor.

Advancement encompasses merits, merits to Above-Scale and further Above-Scale and promotions. Advancements become effective July 1st. See APM 200-17a for the policy regarding the payment of salary increases associated with merits and promotions.

Eligibility does not imply automatic advancement. Departments are required to review the record of each individual when the individual becomes eligible for a normal merit increase or promotion to determine whether or not advancement should be recommended. Advancement follows only upon demonstration of qualification following review.

A dossier must be submitted whether or not Senate Review is waived. See the "Summary of Procedure" section for detailed procedural requirements associated with each category of advancement.

The responsibilities of Recommending Officers are set forth in Appendix 1, "Guidelines for Department Chairs and other Recommending Officers" and Appendix 2, "Synopsis of Academic Personnel Manual Section 220." For an individual with a Joint or Split Appointment, see Appendix 15.

In addition, when an individual has an informal extra-departmental affiliation, the primary department is to obtain from the head of the other unit, an evaluation of the individual’s contribution to that program. The evaluation should include the individual’s scholarly work, names of faculty members who might serve as members of a campus ad hoc review committee, and names of persons at other institutions from whom evaluations of the individual’s scholarly work might be solicited by the department. Any such material provided to the department shall be included by the department in the resulting dossier. In the absence of departmental initiative, the head of the other unit may act freely in proposing departmental consideration of an appropriate personnel action, and may submit to the department any of the material described above.

Note: If service began on or before January 1 for a Fiscal Year appointee, the full year is credited toward eligibility.

Advancement in step not involving change in rank. Review and submission of dossier are required for merit increase and normally occur during the year prior to advancement. Review for merit increases through Professor V and to Professor VII, VIII and IX involves evaluation of performance during the full period of service in the current step. Review for merit increases to Professor VI and Professor Above-Scale involves evaluation of performance during the individual’s entire academic career.

1. Normal Merit Increase

All personnel completing the requisite number of years of service in the indicated steps of this series are eligible for normal merit increase to the next higher step effective July 1st:

2. Accelerated Merit Increase

Advancement in step in advance of eligibility or to a higher step than normal constitutes acceleration and requires evidence of exceptional achievement.

3. Deferred Merit

4. Merit Increase to Professor VI, VII, VIII, IX and Above-Scale

There is no specific normal period of service at the steps above IV and eligibility based on years of service does not apply to advancements beyond Step V. Service at Steps V and above may be of indefinite duration.

1. Advancement to Step VI is based not only upon performance since the last preceding advancement but also upon performance during the individual’s entire academic career. Advancement to Step VI will be granted on evidence of highly distinguished scholarship, highly meritorious service, and evidence of excellent University teaching.  Great distinction, recognized nationally or internationally, in scholarly or creative achievement or in teaching is expected. However, advancement to Step VI will not be granted if performance under any of the criteria -- scholarly or creative achievement, teaching and service -- falls below a level of excellence.  Advancement to Step VI normally will not occur after less than three years at Step V.
    
2. Advancement to Steps VII, VIII and IX will be granted on evidence of continuing achievement at the level required for advancement to Step VI. Advancement normally will not occur after less than three years at the current step.
    
3. Advancement to an Above-Scale salary is reserved for faculty members of the highest distinction, whose work has been nationally and, where relevant, internationally recognized and acclaimed. Except in rare and compelling cases, advancement will not occur after less than four years of service at Step IX. Mere length of service and routine good performance at Step IX is not a justification for further advancement. There must be demonstration of additional merit and distinction beyond the performance on which advancement to Step IX was based. A further merit increase in salary for a person already serving at an Above-Scale level must be justified by new evidence of merit and distinction. Intervals between such salary increases may be indefinitely long and only in the most strongly justified cases will increase at intervals shorter than four years be approved.  Faculty who have attained the rank of Above-Scale may use the title “Distinguished Professor X” as a working title.

5. Senate Review

*Senate Review is waived except in cases where two (2) consecutive, two-year accelerations have been sought.

6. Approval Authority

Authority to approve or deny recommendations rests at the indicated administrative levels except that:

1. any merit increase involving compensation at an Off-Scale rate requires Chancellor’s approval for the Off-Scale rate (unless authority has been generally delegated to the Dean); and
    
2. any merit increase for a Academic Year (9-month) appointee approved by the Dean after the first day of the service for the Fall Quarter, requires Chancellor’s approval for the retroactivity.

Any merit increase for a Fiscal Year appointee approved by the Dean after September 1st, requires Chancellor’s approval for the retroactivity.

3. any merit increase of two years acceleration in the Clinical Professor (Compensated) Series (except Clinical Professor (Compensated) Step VI) has the final approval authority of the Dean, except in cases where two (2) consecutive, two-year accelerations have been sought; the Chancellor has final approval authority.

*Senate Review is waived except in cases where two (2) consecutive, two-year accelerations have been sought.

Advancement in rank within series. Review and submission of dossier are required for Promotion and normally occur during the year prior to advancement. Review for Promotion involves evaluation of performance during the full period of service in the current rank.

1. Normal Promotion

All personnel completing the requisite number of years of service in the indicated steps of this or other Professorial Series are eligible for normal promotion to the indicated rank and step effective July 1st. See APM 200-17a for the policy regarding the payment of salary increases associated with merits and promotions.

Eligibility does not imply automatic advancement. Advancement follows only upon demonstration of qualification following review:

2. Accelerated Promotion

Promotion in advance of eligibility or to a higher rank or step than normal constitutes acceleration and requires evidence of unusual achievement.

3. Senate Review

4. Approval Authority

Resubmission of a departmental recommendation in a case in which there was a final negative decision for advancement or promotion of an Associate or Full Clinical Professor (Compensated) may be made, after appropriate departmental review of the resubmitted file, in any year succeeding the year in which the original submission was made. Except in unusual cases, a final academic personnel decision will not be reconsidered in the same year the case was originally submitted, and a resubmitted proposal will not be approved unless sufficient new evidence has been added to the file.

Appraisal is a formal evaluation of an Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated) which is made in order to arrive at the prospects of the candidate for eventual promotion and to provide information to the candidate regarding those prospects.

Appraisals are characterized as:

1. "Favorable" - indicating an assessment that it appears likely that the individual will eventually qualify for promotion to Associate Clinical Professor (Compensated).
2. "With Reservations" - indicating an assessment that there is identified weakness or imbalance in the record which appears to require correction in order for the individual eventually to qualify for promotion.
3. "Unfavorable" - indicating an assessment that on the present evidence it appears unlikely that the individual will eventually qualify for promotion to tenure rank.

Appraisal is to be conducted during the fourth year of combined service in the Assistant Professor rank of this series, service in the Regular Professor series and other specified titles. See Appendix 14 for "Guide to Computation of Years of Service Which Count Toward the Eight-Year Limit."

Appraisal may also be conducted at any time during service as an Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated) at the election of the department or when requested by the appointee, Dean, Council on Academic Personnel, or Chancellor.

When a required appraisal for an appointee in the Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated) rank coincides with review for merit increase, a single combined dossier should be submitted. Such a dossier is subject to review, approval authority policies and procedural requirements for appraisal.

Note: Whenever the department’s appraisal is unfavorable, a vote must be taken and recommendation made with respect to the separate question of the individual’s continued appointment. A department may recommend an (a) unfavorable appraisal and continuation of appointment; or (b) unfavorable appraisal with recommendation for non-renewal. See Section VIII below on "Non-Renewal of Appointment of an Assistant Professor as a result of a Personnel Review" for procedures regarding non-renewal.

When the department recommends a "with reservations" or "unfavorable" appraisal of the likelihood of eventual promotion, if the record demonstrates positive elements such as conscientious and effective service the department may wish to recommend a merit increase without thereby qualifying its less than favorable appraisal.

C. No Appraisal is required if the individual:

1. is being recommended for promotion effective the following July 1st;
2. has been given notice of a terminal appointment;
3. is subject to an Eight-Year Limit Review; or
4. has given written notice of resignation.

Appraisal recommendations are forwarded to the Dean’s Office for transmittal to the Council on Academic Personnel. Once the Council has commented, the appraisal is ordinarily returned to the Dean for final determination. However, in cases where an "unfavorable" recommendation has been made, the Chancellor becomes the final approval authority. In addition, if CAP makes a "with reservations" recommendation, at their discretion CAP may recommend that the appraisal be reviewed and decided by the Chancellor.

In cases where the Dean is the approval authority, if the Dean’s final assessment differs from that of the Council on Academic Personnel, the custom is for the Dean to discuss the matter with the Council prior to his/her final decision.

Any appraisal for a Academic Year (9-month) appointee approved by the Dean after the first day of the service for the Fall Quarter, requires Chancellor’s approval for the retroactivity.

Any appraisal for a Fiscal Year appointee approved by the Dean after September 1st, requires Chancellor’s approval for the retroactivity.

An Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated) who has completed eight years of service in that title or in combination with other designated titles, cannot be continued after the eighth year unless promoted to associate professor. See Appendix 14, "Guide to the Computation of Years of Service Which Count Toward 
the Eight-Year Limit."

Review and submission of a dossier are required for consideration of promotion no later than the seventh year of service. Departments may recommend either to promote or not. If, as a final outcome of the review process, a decision not to promote is rendered, notice will be issued and a one-year terminal appointment will result.

1. A review during the seventh year of service is not conducted when:

• the appointee has given written notice of resignation, or
• a terminal appointment has already resulted as a result of a prior review.

2. A review during the seventh year of service may be postponed when:

• a request for stopping the clock for substantial child care of a newborn as provided in APM 133-17(h) has been previously approved, or
• a leave of absence has been previously approved to be excluded from service toward the Eight-Year Limit.

See Appendix 25, "Leaves of Absence" for further information. For categories of certain leaves of absence that can be excluded from the count toward the Eight-Year Limit, see Appendix 14 for "Guide to the Computation of Years of Service Which Count Toward the Eight-Year Limit."

All Schools and Colleges

All Schools and Colleges

Note: The final decision by the Chancellor not to promote, cannot be made without the appropriate Preliminary Assessment notification process. See Section IX for process.

VIII. Non-Renewal/Non-Reappointment of an Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated) as a result of a Personnel Review

Though an appointment to a title in this series with a specified ending date expires by its own terms on that date, a recommendation not to continue made on the basis of performance, can only occur as the result of a review. See Section XI if non-renewal is due to budgetary reasons, programmatic changes, or lack of work.

Note: The final decision by the Chancellor not to renew, cannot be made without the appropriate Preliminary Assessment process. See Section IX for process.

If as a result of a review of an Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated), the Chancellor’s preliminary assessment, is not to renew or promote, or is contrary to the departmental recommendation, the Department Chair and the candidate shall be notified of this in writing by the Chancellor.

The final decision, made by the Chancellor not to renew or promote, shall not be made without the appropriate preliminary assessment notification process and opportunity to respond being provided to the candidate.

1. The Department Chair and the candidate shall be notified of this in writing by the Chancellor and be provided with all records placed in the personnel review file subsequent to the departmental review.
    
2. The candidate shall have the opportunity to provide additional information and documentation and may respond in writing either to the Department Chair or directly to the Chancellor.
    
3. The Chair, after appropriate consultation within the department, shall have the opportunity to respond in writing and to provide additional information and documentation.
    
4. The personnel review file, as augmented by the added material, shall then be considered in any stage of the review process as designated by the Chancellor before a final decision by the Chancellor is reached.

When a personnel review results in a final decision (1) not to renew the appointment of an Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated), or, (2) not to promote to Associate Clinical Professor (Compensated) as the result of an Eight-Year Limit review, the Chancellor will provide the individual with written notification of a terminal appointment.

If so desired, the individual may request of the Chancellor that a written statement of the reasons for the non-renewal or decision not to promote be provided. This statement will only be provided upon receipt of a written request.

X. Reconsideration of Terminal Appointment of an Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated)

If, as a result of a personnel review, the Chancellor makes a decision not to renew, an Assistant Clinical Professor (Compensated) the candidate shall be given notice of a terminal appointment. The notice provisions set forth in XI A. and B. are applicable. The faculty member may, during the period prior to the final termination date, request reconsideration. The presumption is that the previous decision was correct, and it will be an unusual case where that decision, which resulted from a lengthy and careful set of reviews, will be reversed on reconsideration. The prior decision will be reversed only if there is substantial new evidence which strengthens the area(s) of weakness in the original record to the extent that the total record now meets the standard for promotion.

1. A faculty member’s request for reconsideration should be communicated to the Chair. The Chair should consult with the faculty member regarding the request and inform the faculty member in writing of the deadline for submission of additional materials, in order to permit timely departmental review. Departments should establish a deadline for making additions to the record, and a time schedule for departmental faculty review, so that there can be timely submission of the case to the Academic Personnel Office. Additions to the record may not be made after the deadline date established by the department. Unless a different deadline has been approved by the Chancellor, the deadline for submission to the Academic Personnel Office of a request for reconsideration, including all additions to the record, is the announced date for submission of departmental recommendations in promotion cases. Submission of a request for reconsideration, consideration of the case in the personnel process, and/or reaffirmation of the original decision will not extend, or otherwise affect, the prior notice of terminal appointment.
   
   
2. A departmental recommendation regarding reconsideration should be submitted by the Chair in accordance with normal academic personnel procedures. There must be a review and vote by the departmental faculty, recommending either reaffirmation or reversal of the previous decision, pursuant to the department’s procedures for consideration of promotions of Assistant Professors. The department should:

1. explicitly identify what new evidence, since the earlier review, is now in the file;
2. explicitly evaluate whatever new evidence there may be; and
3. make a judgment whether the new evidence, if any, is so substantial that, taken together with the record in the previous review, the earlier decision should be reversed.

3. The file must include new Certification Statements signed by the candidate. In transmitting the departmental recommendation the Chair should include in his or her letter a summary of the department’s consideration of each of the above three matters. By way of illustration, "substantial new evidence," as referred to above, might consist of evidence that a major piece of research, not previously reviewed, has been published or accepted for publication. Ordinarily, additional evaluations of previously submitted material will not be viewed as "substantial new evidence."
   
   
4. A request for reconsideration does not automatically initiate consideration of the case by the entire review process. After consultation with the Council on Academic Personnel, the Chancellor determines whether a given case should be referred to an ad hoc review committee and whether this should be the original committee or a new committee. If the case is not referred to an ad hoc review committee, or, if it is so referred, after this committee makes its report, the case is considered in normal review channels, including the Office of the appropriate Dean and the Council on Academic Personnel. Final action is taken by the Chancellor.

Budgetary reasons include discontinuation of the funding for all or part of a program or project on which the appointee works and/or from which all or part of his or her salary is budgeted. Programmatic changes include discontinuation or restructuring of all or part of a program or project on which the appointee works. Lack of work may be because of a change in the emphasis of an on-going program, project or lack of funds.

Prior to the non-renewal of a faculty member for such reasons, the Chair shall consult with the faculty of the department (or appropriate faculty body) before notifying the faculty member of the action to be taken.

1. An appointment to a title in this series with a specified ending date expires by its own terms on that date, and additional notice of the ending of the appointment is not required. However, when an appointment has been renewed at least once, a reasonable period of notice (3 months) should be given.
    
2. If during the term of an appointment it becomes necessary to place an earlier end date, it is desirable that there be not less than 12 calendar months notice of the ending of the appointment (if funding so permits).

If funding for 12 months is not available, then the following standards should apply:

1. 9 calendar months notice for appointees at the Professor Rank; or
2. 6 calendar months notice for appointees at the Associate Professor Rank; or
3. 3 calendar months notice for appointees at the Assistant Professor Rank.

1. Written notice by the Chancellor or designee serves to establish a specific ending date.
    
2. Notification of the decision to establish an ending date and/or not to reappoint will be given in conformity with the guidelines indicated above in Section A-2.

1. If an appointment is not renewed after the ending date of a prior appointment, or in the case of receipt of notice to establish an ending date, the individual may request in writing a written evaluation of his or her academic achievements. Such an evaluation will serve to establish for the record an institutional assessment of the individual’s qualifications and performance.
    
2. The written statement shall be given to the individual before the specified ending date whenever possible. The appointment will, however, end on the specified ending date regardless of the date of the statement.

Note: Faculty members of the School of Medicine who hold a salaried appointment at a hospital affiliated or associated with UCLA or at another affiliated institution, and an appointment at UCLA, are subject to the following policy:

"Continuance of an individual’s UCLA appointment is contingent upon continuance of the individual’s appointment at the affiliated or associated hospital or other affiliated institution pursuant to the policies and procedures of that institution."

In the case of a termination of an individual’s appointment at an affiliated or associated hospital, the notice requirements described in A. and B. above are not applicable.

Once a specific ending date has been established, appointments are subject to the provisions of Standing Order 103.9; termination before the specific ending date shall be made only for good cause and after the opportunity for a hearing before the properly constituted advisory committee of the Academic Senate.

Academic Personnel Manual Section 200-0 mandates that "Every faculty member shall be reviewed at least every five years." Appendix 12 describes in detail the purpose of the Five-Year Review, the criteria to be applied, and the procedure involved. Two features are emphasized regarding the Five-Year Review: