The following section offers guidance to all managers, committee members, and candidates for the three year review process.
Three-Year Review ProcessThe Three-Year Review Process as described below provides an overview of the steps involved for full-time faculty who must undergo this review. The membership of the Three-Year Review Committee are appointed by the Department Chair and serve terms of 3 -5 years. The Committee is composed of 14-16 senior faculty members of the Department of Medicine with Co-Chairs leading the Committee. A faculty member up for review will be assigned a primary and secondary reviewer who will prepare independent reports to present to the Committee as a whole. The primary and secondary reviewers will hold the same job description as the faculty member being reviewed, however they will not be from the same hospital or division as the candidate so as to ensure an arms length discussion.
- When potential new members of the full-time faculty of the Department of Medicine are being considered for appointment, they are informed during the recruitment discussion that all appointments to the Department are probationary for the first three years, with continuation of the appointment beyond three years being contingent upon the outcome of a formal three-year review.
- Once an appointment to the full-time faculty of the Department of Medicine has been approved by the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, a formal letter of appointment is sent to the new member of the Department advising them that the appointment has been approved, and indicating that the first three years are probationary. The appointee is required to sign back a letter to the Chair of the Department, indicating acceptance of the terms and conditions of the appointment. This letter contains the statement, “I am aware that this proposed appointment is subject to the customary three-year probationary period and that my performance must be satisfactory in order to be offered a further appointment.”
- Approximately 2.5 years after the initial appointment (generally in December or January of the third academic year of the appointment), the faculty member receives a letter from the Chair of the Department of Medicine, advising them of the procedure for the three-year review. Specifically, they are asked to prepare a report of their academic activities since the beginning of their appointment to the Department.
- At the same time, the Physician-in-Chief and Departmental Division Director of the new member are asked to provide a detailed, written evaluation of the performance of the faculty member who is to undergo a three-year review. These letters are submitted independently to the Department Chair.
- The materials prepared by the faculty member, together with the letters of evaluation from the Physician-in-Chief and Departmental Division Director are submitted to the Department of Medicine Three-Year Review Committee.
- The documents noted above are distributed for review to the members of the Three-Year Review Committee. The Committee then meets on several occasions and discusses in detail each of the faculty members who are undergoing the three-year review. The Committee reaches a conclusion as to whether the individual in question has met the terms and conditions of their appointment to the Department.
- The conclusion of the Committee is conveyed in a letter by the Chair of the Three-Year Review Committee to the Chair of the Department. This letter summarizes the Committee’s deliberations, and provides the background and rationale for the Committee’s conclusion.
- The Department Chair reviews the Committee’s conclusion, as well as the documentation that was available to the Committee, and decides whether the individual in question is to be offered a continuing annual appointment in the Department or whether the appointment is to be terminated. The Chair conveys this decision in writing to the member of the Department. When the decision reached is not to renew the appointment, the member of the Department is advised by the Chair that the decision can be appealed to the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine.
CANDIDATES REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMISSION OF THREE-YEAR REVIEW
Criteria used for three-year review is based on faculty member’s current job description.
Below is link to job descriptions:
You were appointed to the faculty of the Department of Medicine in 2010. Your appointment was probationary, with continuation after July 1, 2013 being dependent upon the outcome of a three-year review that will be undertaken by the Department of Medicine Three-Year Review Committee, which reports to me.
In anticipation of this review, please assemble the following material and deliver it to the Department of Medicine Office, Fraser Elliott Bldg. 3-805, 190 Elizabeth Street by Friday, March 15, 2013. Late submissions will not be considered.
- Personal Cover Letter - A synopsis of your academic career – what you have accomplished so far, your current academic program / focus and how this might change over the next five years. Note any career interruptions or other factors that may have interfered with you achieving your goals (e.g. maternity leave, illnesses, lack of financial support, clinical load, lack of research space).
This letter should be a reflection of your career that provides a high level overview to the reviewers. Please do not simply summarize your CV or list all of the activities that are readily found in your CV. Include only the key achievements since your appointment to the department of medicine. Attempt to describe how these accomplishments have influenced your patients, your students, your hospital and the university. Emphasize achievements that have had national or international impact.
For clinician teachers and clinician educators include reflections on your teaching effectiveness and the impact of your teaching programs or scholarly work.
Highlight any creative professional activity that can be recognized as making an impact related to professional innovation, exemplary professional practice or the development of professional practices. (see Creative Professional Activity Dossier link below)
Include a summary of your clinical work load including the number of weeks per year attending for each type of clinic service (e.g. In-Patient Ward Service, In-Patient Consult Service, combined In-Patient Ward and Consult Service, Outpatient Clinics). Describe any changes in your clinical work load since your appointment in the Department of Medicine.
It would also be helpful to note the time (e.g. number of meetings) and the influence of your faculty mentor for the past 3 years.
End by providing your future goals, areas that require further development and plans for the next five years.
- A curriculum vitae, see details below on proper CV preparation. It is strongly recommended that your Departmental Division Director review your curriculum vitae before submission.
- You must use WebCV to create and print a copy of your curriculum vitae
- Candidates must follow the Department of Medicine’s Curriculum Vitae Policy Statement as outlined on the Department of Medicine’s web site (use this link)
- In addition to the CV, you should print and include the WebCV generated summary reports. These reports should be generated by WebCV for the years since your appointment to the Department of Medicine.
- Teaching and Education Report (TER) – all candidates
(please run report by academic level NOT by academic year)
- Teaching Data Summary – all candidates
- Refereed Publication Data Summary – all candidates
- Creative Professional Activity Report (CPA) (when applicable)
- Research Awards Data Summary (when applicable)
- Research Supervision Data Summary (when applicable)
Some important aspects to be sure to adhere to are listed below. Note that some of the requirements, such as describing your specific role on publications and grants, require further annotation of your CV. It is suggested that you add these descriptions after generating the final version of your CV with WebCV. The resulting document (.rtf) can then be edited to add the additional information where appropriate.
- Candidates should list peer reviewed grants and manuscripts separately from non-peer reviewed grants and manuscripts. For grants, candidates should clearly indicate their role (e.g. principal investigator/co-principal investigator/co-investigator) and their specific contribution on the grants (role in conceptualizing the study and developing the study methods, writing grant, conducting the study). For manuscripts, candidates should include their role (contributor, principal author, co-principal author, senior or most responsible author) and their specific contribution (role in designing and carrying out the study, supervising students, analyzing the data, writing the first draft of the paper and revising subsequent drafts of the paper).
- For industry funded grants and contracts (e.g. clinical trials) and NCIC cancer trials, candidates should indicate in detail their role (e.g. overall study PI/Co-PI vs. local site PI or site co-investigator) and their specific contribution related to their role in conceptualizing the study and developing the study methods (e.g. primary role in designing study, provided input to a study protocol developed by others, or no significant role in study design), ii) conducting the study (e.g. involved in the management of an international study, national coordinator, responsible for conducting study at candidate’s site) and iii) publishing results from the study (e.g. writing committee, principal author). The candidate should include whether they are chairing or participating as a member of study committees including the steering committee, publications committee, adjudications committee, or the data and safety monitoring committee (DSMB).
- Candidates should include all grants and manuscripts that are under review, indicating the granting agency/journal and their role and specific contribution.
- Candidates should include their manuscripts that are under preparation, indicating their role and specific contribution.
- Two copies of your Teaching Dossier are required for candidates with the job descriptions of Clinician Teachers, Clinician Educators and Clinician Investigators. For further details on proper Teaching Dossier preparation use this web link. Please contact Dr. Anita Rachlis at 416-480-6044 or 416-480-2399 if you require additional help on how to compile your Teaching Dossier.
Candidates should distinguish clearly between numbers of hours that they participated in formal teaching (i.e. lectures, seminars and workshops that are not a part of bedside teaching responsibilities) and teaching that is done in the context of supervising residents and medical students in clinics or on the ward.
- All other teaching material (e.g. teaching evaluations, teaching effectiveness scores, unsolicited letters from students and colleagues, etc.) should be inserted into your teaching dossier. Candidates should include evaluations from lectures and presentations but do not include filler materials such as copies of their Power Point slide presentations, complete course notes or book chapters, e-mail communications with confidential information, copies of their Outlook calendars showing work schedules or meeting minutes.
- You must also send, as soon as possible, a copy of your curriculum vitae to your Physician-in-Chief and Departmental Division Director who are responsible for writing letters of support for your three-year review.
A workshop to assist you in preparation for your three-year review will be held Wednesday, November 21, 2012, from 1:30 pm to 3:30 pm at the Toronto General Hospital Medical Education Office, Room EN Ground 025/026. It is strongly recommended that you attend this workshop. Please RSVP your attendance to firstname.lastname@example.org
If there are extenuating reasons for which your review should be delayed, please contact me by phone 416-946-8071 or by e-mail at email@example.com. Please contact Jim Hartley at 978-1549 or firstname.lastname@example.org should you require further information or assistance.
Three-Year Review Workshop, November 21, 2012
For the Reviewers
Three Year Review Checklist (for Reviewers only)