Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 9 Next »

CEO Appointment & Evaluation

POLICY DEVELOPMENT

Policy Name:CEO Appointment & Evaluation

Issuing Office:

Board of Trustees

Policy Author:


Contributing Offices:


Affected Parties:


Location where Existing Policy can be Viewed:


Complete Wording of New or Revised Policy:

The Chancellor/President is appointed by the Board of Trustees and is the Chief Executive Officer of the University.


The Executive Committee shall formally evaluate the Chancellor/President annually. The results of the evaluation shall be attached to the official minutes of the Executive Committee. A report on the formal evaluation shall be provided by the Chair of the Executive Committee. The Chair shall, after discussion of the evaluation, bring a motion to accept the evaluation. The evaluation shall be according to the following procedures:

  1. The Chairman of the Executive Committee shall distribute to Executive Committee members the evaluation criteria at the meeting of the Committee.
  2. The evaluation may address those items in the University's Strategic Plan that the Executive Committee determines to be within the direct purview of the Chancellor/Presidents as well as any other matters of leadership the Executive Committee determines to be relevant. The evaluation criteria and process should be reviewed and updated periodically by the Executive Committee.
  3. Following discussion with the Chancellor/President at the meeting of the Executive Committee, the members of the Committee shall complete the evaluation.
  4. The results of the evaluation shall be attached to the official minutes of the Executive Committee

The Chairman of the Executive Committee shall provide summary comments concerning the evaluation in his report to the full Board at the Annual Meeting and, following discussion, shall request a motion to accept the report, including a summary of the evaluation.

Policy Rationale:

This standard assumes that the governing board is that group which holds the institution and its well being in trust. This group also has responsibility for selecting and evaluating the chief executive officer. Few trustee activities are as consequential to the institution’s future and well being as finding and selecting the best possible chief executive officer, and few activities provide a better opportunity for assessing the institution’s present condition and future needs.

SACS Criteria:

 3.2.1  Chief Executive Officer

The governing board of the institution is responsible for the selection and the periodic evaluation of the chief executive officer.  

Other Regulatory Criteria:


Definition of Glossary Terms:


Policy Keywords:


Implementation Description:


PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND REVIEW

Policy Administrators:

Board of Trustees

Policy Review Cycle:

The Commission expects that a reasonable periodic evaluation would be at least every three years.

Procedures:


Sanctions:


Exceptions:


Other Policy Link Locations:





  • No labels