The Board will systematically and rigorously monitor the Chancellor's job performance to determine the extent to which Outcomes are being achieved and whether operational activities fall within parameters established in Chancellor Limitations policies.
The purpose of monitoring is simply to determine the degree to which the Chancellor is fulfilling the Board's expectations as set forth in its governing policies. Only information that enables the Board to assess accomplishment of Outcomes and compliance with Chancellor Limitations is considered relevant.
- A given policy may be monitored in one or more of three methods:
- Chancellor Report: The Chancellor conveys to the Board, in writing, policy interpretations as well as compliance information relevant to the policy under review. As appropriate in a given context, the Chancellor may present information to justify the "reasonableness" of his/her interpretation.
- External Report: Discovery of compliance information by a disinterested, external auditor, inspector, or judge who is selected by and reports directly to the Board. Such reports must assess executive performance only against policies of the Board (as reasonably interpreted by the Chancellor), not those of the external party unless the Board has previously indicated in Governing Board policy that party's opinion to be the standard for assessment.
Direct Board Inspection: A designated Board Member, committee, or the Board as a whole assesses accomplishment of, or compliance with, a given policy, as reasonably interpreted by the Chancellor.
In every case, the Board will judge whether a) the Chancellor's interpretation is reasonable and b) whether data demonstrate reasonable accomplishment of, or compliance with, the Chancellor's interpretation. Interpretations determined by the Board to be unreasonable, or data determined not to demonstrate reasonable accomplishment of or compliance with a Board policy, as reasonably interpreted, will be subject to a remedial process agreed to by the Board.
All policies instructing the Chancellor will be monitored at a frequency and by a method chosen by the Board. The Board may choose to monitor any policy by any method at any time, but will ordinarily depend on the schedule appearing on the subsequent page.
The Board will have a formal evaluation of the Chancellor in May of each year. The evaluation will be based primarily on a summary/review of the Board's judgment of the Chancellor's performance, per the criteria and process outlined above, during the previous twelve months. In addition, in consultation with the Chancellor, the Board may utilize an instrument that evaluates the Chancellor.
|Broadest Outcome Statement||Internal||Annually||November|
|2.0 General Chancellor Constraint||Internal||Quarterly/Annually||DEC; MAR; MAY|
|2.1 Treatment of Students||Internal||Monthly/Annually||Student Club Reports|
|2.2 Treatment of Faculty and Staff||Internal||Quarterly/Annually||DEC; MAR; MAY|
|2.3 Interactions With the Public||Internal||Quarterly||DEC; MAR; MAY|
| 2.4 Financial Condition and Activities
||Internal||Type of Reports||CAFR; ELR; BURN|
|Direct Inspection (Audit and Finance Committee)||Quarterly||DEC; MAR; MAY|
|External||Annually (Auditor General)||June|
|2.5 Asset Protection||Internal||Annually||May|
|2.6 Financial planning and budgeting||Internal||Annually||May|
|2.7 Staff Compensation and Benefits||Internal||Quarterly||DEC; MAR; MAY|
|2.8 Communication and Counsel to the Board||Internal||Monthly/Quarterly||DEC; MAR; MAY|
|2.9 Operational Succession Planning||Internal||Quarterly||DEC; MAR; MAY|
|2.10 Public Safety||Internal||Annually||May|
AMENDED April 25, 2017, Motion No. 10484 and Motion No. 10485
AMENDED April 28, 2015, Motion No. 10292
AMENDED October 22, 2013, Motion No. 10112
AMENDED February 22, 2011, Motion No. 9781, 9782