Skip to content Skip to main navigation Report an accessibility issue

Guidelines for Annual Performance and Planning Reviews (APPR) for University-based Joint Faculty (JFU)


This document provides procedural guidance for conducting annual reviews for joint faculty who are based at UTK and have an additional appointment at ORNL or some other research facility. As such, this document supplements the Faculty Handbook, which describe the rights and responsibilities of all UTK and UTIA faculty. Nothing in these guidelines is intended to diminish or amplify those rights and responsibilities. In the event that a contradiction between these guidelines and the Handbook, the Handbook remains the governing document.


The UTK Faculty Handbook mandates that all faculty, except those on leave or in the first year of appointment, be reviewed annually.1 This requirement applies equally to tenure-line and non-tenure line faculty, including Joint Faculty.2

The UTK Faculty Handbook also establishes a reporting structure for those holding joint appointments:

The primary department with which the faculty member is affiliated, through which all matters of promotion, salary raise, and tenure are processed, is the “home” department. On all matters, the home department should consult with the department head and faculty of the other unit. Where joint appointments involve equal time in two or more units or service primarily within an interdisciplinary program, it is the shared responsibility of the heads, deans, or other administrative officers to make appropriate recommendations; and in such cases, one of the two units should be designated as the home department. The original appointment letter must specify the faculty member’s home department, administrative reporting relationships, and the peer group(s) to be consulted in tenure and promotion recommendations. (§3.5, Joint and Intercampus Appointments)

While the UTK Faculty Handbook stipulates that joint faculty should be evaluated annually, and that the responsibility for evaluation falls to the “home” department, it does not define a clear process for how this review should be conducted for faculty who hold joint appointments with an external entity such as ORNL.


Effective evaluation of joint faculty-university (JFU) requires input from the university department head and the supervisor from the external employing entity. These guidelines have been created in order to ensure annual communication between the two employers regarding each employer’s evaluation of the faculty member’s performance.


The following procedure is recommended for the annual evaluation of external joint faculty (which include, but are not limited to, joint faculty based at the university (JFU) working with ORNL).

  1. This external joint faculty review process applies only for those JFUs who are funded by a combination of UTK and non-UTK
  2. The review will take place according to the UTK faculty review cycle (typically, early Fall semester of each calendar year), using the relevant processes outlined in the UTK Faculty Handbook.
  3. The UTK department head will request input from the non-UTK supervisor of the joint faculty relative to annual performance on the work done by the faculty member for the non-UTK
  4. The department head and supervisor will summarize their evaluations in a joint evaluation, to be entered by the department head in the UTK online annual evaluation system (as is typical for all faculty evaluations).
  5. In the event that there is a significant difference in the evaluations by the individual supervisors, the joint evaluation should note and explain those
  6. In the event that the joint employer does not respond with input to the department head in a timely manner, the department head will document the efforts to solicit this input in the annual
  7. The department head uses best judgment to weight the input according to appointment percentages and departmental expectations, to determine the overall annual evaluation scores and
  8. The joint evaluation letter will be part of the annual review record of the joint faculty at UTK.
  9. After the annual review is finalized by the Provost, if the joint faculty member’s performance fails to meet expectations in either the department or the non-UTK organization, the department head and supervisor will work with the joint faculty member to devise a plan to address the deficiencies, in a manner consistent with the policies outlined in the UTK Faculty Handbook. The plan will cover the succeeding year’s
  10. This recommended procedure does not replace official UTK policy for annual If anything in this procedure is in conflict with UTK policy, the UTK policies govern.

1 See §3.8.1, 4.3

2 “Joint Faculty members are evaluated on their allocation of effort in the UTK department or college on an annual basis.” §4.2.8