Policies

84 Steps to Faculty Hiring

1. Departments determine hiring needs.
2. Dean submits request for hires to Provost.
3. Provost allocates positions to colleges.
4. Dean allocates positions to departments.
5. Department Chair calls for election of Search and Screen Committee.
6. Department Chair provides Faculty Affairs and the Office of Equity and Compliance with the names of the Search Committee members.
7. Department Chair shares with the Search Committee the link to the Tenure Track Hiring Toolkit posted on the Faculty Affairs website and the requirement for the two training workshops (three hours each).
8. Search Committee members attend the two trainings, and familiarize themselves with the Tenure Track Hiring Toolkit.
9. Dean and FECR meet with the Search Committee (charge meeting).
10. Department Chair meets with the Search Committee.
11. Search Committee develops Part 1 documents (Master Tracker, Position Announcement using CSUN template, Recruiting and Advertising Plan, Rubrics and scoring for initial and secondary screenings).
12. Search Committee Chair submits Part 1 to FECR, through OnBase, for approval.
13. FECR reviews Part 1 documents for EEO Best Practices and returns it to Search Committee Chair with feedback.
14. Search Committee revises Part 1 and Search Committee Chair returns revised Part 1 to FECR.
15. FECR reviews revised Part 1 and returns to Search Committee Chair with additional feedback, or certifies Part 1 documents for EEO Best Practices.
16. FECR forwards certified Part 1 documents to the two Co-Directors for approval.
17. FECR forwards certified Part 1 documents to Dean for approval.
18. Search Committee Chair downloads certified/approved documents from OnBase and forwards them to CHRS liaison.
19. CHRS liaison creates Job Card which initiates CHRS recruiting process.
20. Department Chair approves Job Card in CHRS.
21. Dean approves Job Card in CHRS.
22. Faculty Affairs’ Academic Personnel Analyst reviews Job Card in CHRS for completeness and accuracy.
23. AVP for Faculty Affairs approves Job Card.
24. Case coordinator in the Office of Equity and Compliance assigns a position number in CHRS.
25. AVP for Equity and Compliance approves documents in CHRS.
26. Faculty Affairs’ Academic Personnel Analyst advertises approved position announcement and sends it to the Search Committee.
27. Search Committee advertises approved position announcement.
28. Search Committee Chair confirms with Faculty Affairs that ad was advertised.
29. Search Committee develops Part 2 documents (phone interview questions, letters of recommendation review format, campus visit activities, reference check questions, rubrics and scoring for each activity).
30. Search Committee Chair submits Part 2 to FECR through OnBase.
31. FECR reviews Part 2, and returns it to Search Committee Chair with feedback.
32. Search Committee revises Part 2, and Search Committee Chair returns it to the FECR.
33. FECR reviews revised Part 2, and returns it to Search Committee with additional feedback, or certifies it as EEO compliant and forwards it to the two Co-Directors for approval.
34. Co-Directors approve certified Part 2.
35. Dean approves certified Part 2.
36. Search Committee Chair down loads approved/certified Part 2.
37. Search Committee conducts primary screening of applications using rubric.
38. Search Committee Chair updates Master Tracker.
39. Search Committee Chair sends letters of elimination to candidates that did not meet minimum qualifications.
40. Search Committee conducts secondary screening using rubric.
41. Search Committee Chair updates Master Tracker.
42. Search Committee seeks approval of desired interview list from Dean.
43. Search Committee conducts approved phone interviews using rubric.
44. Search Committee Chair updates Master Tracker.
45. Search Committee reviews letters of reference using rubric.
46. Search Committee selects candidates for campus interviews, and seeks approval from Dean.
47. Dean meets with FECR to review screening process.
48. Dean approves campus interview list, and notifies Search Committee and Department Chair.
49. Dean updates Provost.
50. Search Committee Chair informs department of on-campus interviews.
51. Search Committee Chair informs FECR of campus interviewee documents to be shared with faculty.
52. Search Committee Chair makes interviewee documents available to faculty.
53. Search Committee Chair sends letters of elimination.
54. On-campus interviews, using rubrics and scoring.
55. Search Committee tabulates scores and determines a short-list of candidates.
56. Search Committee Chair updates Master Tracker.
57. Search Committee conducts reference checks using the approved common set of questions and rubric.
58. Search Committee determines list of finalists.
59. Search Committee Chair updates Master Tracker.
60. Search Committee and FECR meet with faculty for consultation concerning the committee’s list of finalists and hiring recommendation.
61. Optional consultation meeting with faculty at the discretion of the Dean (in cases where the Search Committee and faculty disagree).
62. Search Committee Chair uploads Part 3 documents (list of finalists and Master Tracker) into OnBase.
63. Department Chair acknowledges receipt of materials uploaded by Search Committee Chair.
64. AVP for Equity and Compliance approves documents.
65. Dean reviews and approves documents.
66. Faculty Affairs marks search complete.
67. Dean reviews finalist list and Master Tracker in OnBase.
68. Dean meets with Search Committee and Department Chair to discuss finalists.
69. Dean approves list of finalists.
70. Department Chair submits resource implications to Dean.
71. Dean selects candidate to make an offer to.
72. Dean ensures preliminary background check.
73. Dean informs Department Chair and Search Committee which candidate was selected.
74. Dean contacts candidate with contingent offer.
75. Dean notifies Department Chair of candidate’s acceptance, and terms of the offer.
76. Department Chair submits request to HR to begin background check, and waits for approval.
77. Department staff member submits chargeback to pay for background check.
78. Department submits hiring packet (Recruitment Record Certification, Position Announcement, Recruitment and Advertising Plan, Master Tracker) through CHRS for processing of official offer.
79. Search Committee Chair sends letters of elimination.
80. Faculty Affairs prepares official offer letter.
81. Provost signs official offer letter.
82. Signed official offer letter is posted into CHRS by Faculty Affairs.
83. Applicant accepts offer.
84. Faculty Affairs notifies Dean, DFO, Department Chair, and Coordinator of acceptance.

CMS Policy for the Assignment and Evaluation of Online Teaching

Campus Indirect Cost Calculations

Download Campus Indirect Cost Calculator PDF

College Personnel Procedures

 Procedure to Purchase IT Equipment, College of Science and Mathematics

Information Technology related purchases will be processed centrally through College Information Technology Department to improve uniformity and compatibility of our IT equipment and software, inventory review and better pricing.

The steps below provide information about the procedure to follow when departments are requesting IT equipment and software.

1. The budget for IT equipment and software purchases remains in each department.

2. Faculty or Staff requesting such purchases, completes the “IT Purchase Request/ Acquisition Form” and a designated employee (Chair/Dept. Secretary/Technician) should send the form signed by the dept. chair to CSMIT, mail drop 8238 OR email it to .

3. College IT personnel will evaluate, consult with the departments and process the order through online Solar Financial Requisitions or P-Card as appropriate, utilizing the corresponding Department ID for posting the purchases.

More Info

Policies on use of Computing Labs:

•  Administration, installation, upgrading and removal of software (including plug-ins and system patches), and repair of all College lab computers will be done by authorized CSMIT technical support personnel, or authorized designees. Users authorized to use the College computing labs will not install any software applications, upgrades, patches or add-on software to any lab computer.
• All software uses in College computing labs should be licensed.
• Computers in computing labs have been configured in accordance with the academic needs of the students using the specific facility. Tampering with the files on any fixed or network drive, hardware or software, is not allowed.
• Programs, files or documents saved on lab computers are not backed up and may be accessed by anyone.
• CSMIT will be compliant with all procedures and policies detailed under University IT Procedures and Policies – Sector 500. The steps below provide information about the procedure to follow when departments are requesting IT equipment and software.

Installation Requests:

Instructors wishing to make software applications available to their students for educational purposes, either in the open lab, or in computer classrooms, may request such installation.

• Such requests may only be made by College faculty or staff.
• Generally, software installations for labs must be requested to CSMIT at least 2 weeks before the start of the semester in advance of the required use, in order to provide College technical support personnel the opportunity to test the software for functionality and for compatibility with the installed software base on the computers for which it is intended.
• Requests for software installations in the labs during the semester must also be requested to CSMIT at least 3 weeks in advance of the required use. The steps below provide information about the procedure to follow when departments are requesting IT equipment and software.

Lab Scheduling :

• To schedule a lab for use as a full-time / part-time classroom during the quarter, instructors should contact CSMIT through email.
• Labs available for periodic use are scheduled on a first-come, first served basis, so instructors should make such requests in a timely manner.

Connection of Personal Computer/Telecommunications Equipment:

• Users are not allowed to connect their personal equipment to the college wired network in the computer labs.

Policy on Research Bridge Funds, College of Science and Mathematics

The College of Science and Mathematics strongly supports scholarship and student mentoring. The College also recognizes that a vibrant research program depends upon external funding, and that awards by agencies such as the NSF, NIH, NASA, and DOE are extremely competitive. A year without grant support while teaching a heavy load can severely impact research productivity and the ability to submit proposals. The Research Bridge Fund Policy was developed to aid those faculty members whose grant(s) ended and are facing the prospect of a full teaching load. The College, with the help of the Provost’s Office, will provide bridge funding for a maximum of one year immediately following the end date of a major external grant. If the PI obtains a one year no-cost extension to the grant, bridge funding will only be provided during that extended year. 

A major grant is defined as one that generates at least $18,000 of indirect costs as described in the California State University, Northridge Large Grants Policy. Under the College’s Research Bridge Funds Policy the PI will be provided with reassigned time equivalent to that received during the externally funded period, up to 12 units per year. The reassigned time must be used during the regular academic year, over one or two semesters. In addition, the PI will receive up to $5,000 for O&E to maintain their lab. In order to be eligible for the funds, the PI:

1. Must have submitted a proposal for a major grant as defined above during the last year of the ending external grant (or grants). In addition, it is expected that during the year of bridge funding, the PI will demonstrate good use of the reduced teaching load by submitting additional external grant proposals and peer-reviewed manuscripts. OR
2. Will submit a proposal for a major grant during the year of the no-cost extension (when they are being supported by the bridge funding). This intention to submit a proposal must be stated in the request for bridge funding and justified with a submission plan that includes at a minimum plans for final data collection, manuscript submissions, and proposal submission deadlines. It is also expected that during the year of the bridge funding, the PI will demonstrate good use of the reduced teaching load by submitting additional external grant proposals and peer-reviewed manuscripts either in the same year or in the subsequent year.

Funding under the Bridge Policy will continue until funding from a major grant begins, but not for more than one academic year. 

Requests for Bridge Funding should be directed to the Dean of the College of Science and Mathematics. Applications need to include a description of eligibility (specify the expiring grant, the proposal submitted during the final year if applicable, and provide copies of the relevant proposal approval forms), the number of reassigned time units being requested, the amount of O&E requested with a justification, a current CV, and a brief letter of support from the Department Chair.

All materials must be received in the Dean’s Office no later than May 1st. 

Renovations/Projects: From Planning to Completion, College of Science and Mathematics

1. Any faculty member wanting renovations should first contact the department technician/representative and Department Chair. Together they will then develop a preliminary plan for the project.

2. The faculty member and department representative will then meet with the shop staff to go over the preliminary plan and the shop staff will develop a final plan in consultation with the department representative and faculty member. The shop staff will forward the final plan, in the form of a written Work Request and scale drawing, to the faculty member, department representative, and MAR.

3. The department representative sends the shop drafted Work Request and drawing to PPM as part of the requisition for an estimate. When the estimate comes back from PPM, the department representative will notify the shop staff that the project has been accepted or rejected.

4. Normally once the project has started the shop staff acts as the liaison between the College and PPM, keeping the department representative informed as needed. If there is communication between PPM and the department representative, it is important that the shop be informed. Any change in the scope of work must be communicated to the science shop.

5. The shop staff will inform the department representative when the project is completed.

Dr. Jerry Stinner / Dean, College of Science and Mathematics                                       

Date: 02/18/2009

It is the policy of the College of Science and Mathematics that laboratory facilities, equipment and supplies are only to be used by College faculty, staff and students in the pursuit of instructional and research endeavors. Any exceptions to this policy must have prior written approval by both the Dean of the College and Provost. All departments within the College must comply with this policy. This policy was discussed and agreed upon by the College Dean and Department Chairs at a meeting on February 18th, 2009.

CSM Limited Submission Pre-Proposal/Proposal Review and Recommendation Guidelines

• When granting agencies limit the number of submissions to one per university, and there are multiple pre-proposals/proposals from faculty members within the College of Science and Mathematics, the Department Chairs will normally meet to review and rank them. Reviews should at a minimum be based upon the granting agencies guidelines, the clarity and quality of the written pre-proposals/proposals, and the impact upon the College and University.
• In those cases in which a Department Chair is an investigator on a pre-proposal/proposal, that Chairperson will recuse him/herself from any discussions pertaining to their pre-proposal/proposal. That person can, however, participate in reviews of the remaining pre-proposals/proposals. If the Chairperson does not want to participate in the review process because of the potential conflict of interest, that person may choose an alternate committee member from their department.
• When multiple Department Chairs are investigators on the pre-proposals/proposals, and the Committee of Department Chairs cannot reach consensus because of competing conflicts of interest, an alternate ad hoc review Committee shall be selected from among the tenured faculty members, with equal representation from each of the five departments.  Members of the faculty will be selected by the Department Chairs, with final approval by the Dean.
• Recommended rankings will be forwarded to the Dean, who then may or may not meet with the review Committee members to discuss the rankings.
• The Dean will make a final recommendation to the AVP for Research and Graduate Studies.
• All pre-proposals/proposals must be written in accordance with any guidelines specified by the  Office of Research and Graduate Studies and/or granting agency, and be received by the Dean for review and ranking no later than two weeks prior to the Office of Research and Graduate Studies deadline.

College of Science and Mathematics Policy on Space Utilization

 Overview

Research and hands-on student education are critical to the mission of the College of Science and Mathematics, both of which require a considerable amount of infrastructure including laboratory and office space. In fact, the main space issue in the College continues to be the allocation of research facilities for faculty and their students. Recognizing that space needs will only intensify in the future as research continues to expand in the College, and that significant additional space beyond the current five buildings is unlikely, effective management of research and office space must be a priority. While management of space is best accomplished at the department level where the most informed decisions can be made, and there are no doubt a diversity of needs among investigators which dictate individual assignments of space, there are College level over-arching principles governing space utilization which can be broadly applied to the assignment of space.

Guiding Principles

• The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs has ultimate responsibility for the allocation of space within the Colleges. Within each College this responsibility has been delegated to the respective Dean. 
• Within each Department, the Department Chair normally has decision-making authority concerning the assignment of space within his/her department to ensure that the most in-depth knowledge of the activities and needs of researchers determine allocations of research space.
• Research space assignments are not permanent, and may be reassigned at any time as research activities change. Hence, less productive faculty members may be required to relinquish space when others have growth in their research programs or a new faculty member has been recruited.
• There should be periodic reviews (three year cycle) of all space utilization within the College, applying metrics to assist in evaluating the efficiency of use (both quantitative and qualitative metrics—see below).
• Space that is vacant or underutilized should be reassigned or repurposed. There should be a defined plan to improve utilization before reassignment or repurposing of space.
• Optimal use of research space includes shared use of resources and facilities.
• All research conducted in the College of Science and Mathematics must comply with University conflict of interest policies.

Metrics

Recognizing the complexity of research needs and that there is no “one size fits all” approach, a variety of quantitative and qualitative measures should be applied in the assignment of space. Financial measures are only one part of the overall assessment of productivity.

• Total externally sponsored (direct + indirect costs) and internally sponsored expenditures; $/sq. ft.
• Alignment of the research activity with the strategic priorities of the College.
• Number of students participating in the research, including number of MS students graduated.
• Number of post docs, technicians, and doctoral students supported by grants and participating in the research.
• Number of peer reviewed papers published from work conducted in the space.
• Type of research conducted in the space (e.g. theoretical, equipment intensive, field).

Best Practices

• The Department Chairs as a group, using the Guiding Principles and Metrics listed above, will conduct a review of all space utilization (classrooms, teaching labs, offices, research labs, etc.) within the five buildings at least once every three years. A summary report with recommendations will be forwarded to the Dean who will, in consultation with the Department Chairs, make decisions regarding space allocation.
• The College will maintain an up-to-date Space Inventory on the College website that captures individual room information including type, square footage, and occupant(s).
• Reallocations and/or repurposing of space within the College must first be reviewed by the Department Chairs, who will then forward their recommendation along with the proposal to the College Dean for final approval. All proposals sent to the Department Chairs must have prior written approval by the relevant Department Chair. Any reallocations and/or repurposing of space must be noted on the Space Inventory.
• Any additional space needed by an award (e.g. for equipment, technicians, graduate students, post-doctoral fellows) must be approved by the relevant Department Chair, the Department Chairs as a group, and the Dean prior to submission of the grant proposal.
• As a rule of thumb, if a piece of equipment is not used or only very rarely used, serious consideration needs to be given to discarding it. Space is limited and should be viewed as a valued resource; hoarding is inexcusable and cannot be tolerated.
• In general when assigning space for new faculty hires a research wet lab of about 500 square feet is the College norm. Individual spaces considerably above that value need special approval (relevant Department Chair, Department Chairs as a group, Dean), and any faculty member in possession of such labs will need special justification and approvals.
• FERP faculty members should share office and laboratory space.
• There is no obligation to provide offices or other space for emeriti faculty members.