The Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE) requires all faculty members to be evaluated in writing at least once annually. At UNLV, all full-time academic faculty members (including faculty-in-residence and lecturers) are evaluated for the calendar year (January 1 through December 31) during the first three months of the following year.

The content on this website is designed to assist faculty, evaluators, and administrative staff and ensure that evaluations are completed in a thorough and timely manner. The current evaluation process is fully electronic and carried out through UNLV Folio.

Questions regarding the evaluation process can be directed to

Annual Evaluation General Timeline

Please note the following actions all occur within the UNLVFolio system

December Faculty member ensures all activities are up to date for the year under review.
January Faculty member generates Faculty Annual Achievement Report and submits material for their supervisor to view.
February Supervisor completes the Faculty Annual Evaluation Report and reviews with the faculty member. Faculty member acknowledges the receipt of their Annual Evaluation Report by signing the report.
March 1-15 Dean reviews and signs Annual Evaluation Reports for their unit and “sends” the case forward to the Office of Faculty Affairs.
March 15 Deadline for signed Annual Evaluation Reports to be sent to the Office of Faculty Affairs.

Three-Year Review of Dean
and Vice Provosts/Presidents

Per NSHE requirements, all deans and vice provosts/presidents are subject to annual evaluation by their supervisor, the Executive Vice President and Provost. Additionally, UNLV policies require executive-level administrators to undergo a comprehensive 360-degree review every three years that incorporates feedback from faculty and staff in the unit as well as from other internal and external stakeholders. Below is the schedule for the three-year review of deans and vice provosts/presidents at UNLV.

Process Workflow

The standard unit-level and university-level review processes, along with variations due to a request for peer review or submission of a written response/rejoinder, are described below:

Provost Annual Evaluation Workflow Chart

Click for full-size image.

Flow Chart

Click for full-size image.

Disagreement Process

If an academic faculty member disagrees with their evaluation, they can either file a rejoinder or request a review by a peer committee. UNLV Bylaws (Chapter III, Section 8.3)

NSHE Code and UNLV Bylaws

The UNLV annual evaluation process is governed by the NSHE Code (Title 2, Chapter 5.12-13) and the UNLV Bylaws (Chapter III, Section 8.1-8.5). According to these policies:

  • Tenure-track and untenured faculty are to be ranked using the four-point scale of “Excellent,” Commendable,” “Satisfactory,” and “Unsatisfactory.” Since 2007, the practice at UNLV has been for tenured faculty to be evaluated on a two-point scale of “Satisfactory” and “Unsatisfactory.”
  • As part of the evaluation of all tenure-track faculty, the department chair/director is asked to initial that he or she has met with the tenured faculty and incorporated into the evaluation the sense of the tenured faculty on the progress of the candidate toward tenure and promotion.
  • A chair/director who identifies unsatisfactory performance or finds significant need for improvement in the written evaluation of an academic faculty member must include a remediation plan for improvement.


The academic faculty annual evaluation process is managed by the Office of Faculty Affairs. Questions regarding the evaluation process can be directed to