Process, Timeline, and Expectations

All new full-time clinical faculty appointed to the Department of Medicine at the University of Toronto must complete a Continuing Faculty Appointment Review (CFAR) at the end of the three-year probationary period. This requirement may be waived for new appointees joining at the rank of associate or full professor at the request of the Chair of the Department and discretion of the Faculty of Medicine.

CFAR is conducted by the CFAR Committee, which is comprised of 14-16 senior Department of Medicine faculty members appointed by the Department Chair. Each faculty member is reviewed independently by a primary and secondary reviewer. At review, the contributions of the faculty member are evaluated based on their academic position description, initial Academic Planning Document, the quality and quantity of their teaching, and professional behaviour. Further information may be found in the detailed breakdown of the documentation and expectations by academic position description.

Upon successful review the candidate’s appointment status is changed from probationary to continuing. Faculty members that are placed on extended probation are reviewed one to two years later. It is not uncommon for clinician-scientists to require five years from initial appointment to meet the requirements for successful continuing appointment review. If a faculty member is determined to have been unsuccessful at meeting the requirements after a further probationary period, the decision not to renew may be made. This may be appealed as outlined in the Procedures Manual for Clinical Faculty.

Expectations at Continuing Faculty Appointment Review

Timeline

Current Year’s Timeline

Expectations at CFAR

Professionalism

All faculty members are expected to have demonstrated compliance with the University/Faculty of Medicine and CPSO codes of conduct regarding professional behaviour. Further resources regarding professionalism can be found on the dedicated departmental page.

Teaching Effectiveness

All faculty members are expected to have demonstrated teaching effectiveness, in terms of quality and quantity, as appropriate for their academic position description. Information regarding Teaching Expectations can be found on the relevant departmental page.

Scholarship (Creative Professional Activities and Research)

Depending on the academic position description, productivity in terms of creative professional activities (CPA) or research is also expected to have been demonstrated. Expectations regarding scholarship of faculty members at CFAR by academic position description and academic rank at appointment are outlined in the table, below:

Academic Position Description

Initial appointment at the rank of lecturer

Initial appointment at the rank of assistant professor

Clinician-teacher

Demonstrated teaching effectiveness (quality and quantity; formal and informal) with potential for sustained excellence in teaching

Completion of health professional education training

Demonstrated progress towards eligibility for assistant professor

Demonstrated teaching effectiveness (quality and quantity; formal and informal) with potential for sustained excellence in teaching

Scholarship in the form of CPA at least locally is encouraged but not required

Clinician in quality & innovation Eligible for promotion to assistant professor

Scholarship in the form of CPA related to QI at least locally with high potential for impact

Clinician-educator Eligible for promotion to assistant professor Scholarly productivity in the form of CPA related to education or education research with high potential for impact
Clinician-investigator (research or QI) Eligible for promotion to assistant professor Scholarly productivity in the form of research or quality and innovation–related CPA or Research with high potential for impact, e.g. first or senior author peer-review publications and/or substantive intellectual contributions to research publications (e.g., site PI for multi-centre clinical trials)
Clinician-scientist (all research types) Eligible for promotion to assistant professor

Demonstrated progress towards establishment of an independent research program with high potential for impact

Scholarly productivity, e.g., PI operating grant, first- or senior-authored peer-review publications

Submission of application for a salary support award (within five years)

Timeline

The CFAR review cycle runs from July to June and has five stages:

Identifying Candidates – July-September

The Department of Medicine identifies and notifies full-time faculty members who are in the third year of their probationary period based on the date that the full-time appointment began. If a faculty member was appointed after October 1st of the academic year (July to June), the review will be postponed until the following year (e.g. an appointment in October 2014 would be reviewed in 2018 rather than 2017). A request to delay the review may be made by the faculty member or physician-in-chief (PIC) to the Departmental Chair if the  faculty member has had an extended leave of absence (e.g. extended medical leave, maternity leave).

Distributing Documentation and Information – September-January

Candidates are provided dates for information sessions, submission deadlines, and documentation details. The offices of the departmental division directors (DDD) and physicians-in-chief are also notified of all CFAR deadlines. A mandatory workshop is held for all candidates, usually in early- to mid-November.

Assembling Documents – January-February

The standardized documentation required for CFAR is submitted by the candidates through the Sharefile system. These documents are compiled along with the review letters of the departmental division directors and the physicians-in-chief.

Review and Recommendations – March-May

The Continuing Faculty Appointment Review is conducted by the Continuing Appointment Faculty Review Committee. Two reviewers are assigned by the committee chairs to independently review all documents and formulate an opinion prior to a committee meeting. At the committee meeting, reviewers' appraisals are discussed in detail, including whether or not there have been any barriers or challenges to the academic success of the candidate that warrant attention. A recommendation to the Chair is then formulated based on their opinion as to whether the individual has met the terms and conditions of their appointment to the department. The committee either recommends continuing annual appointment in the department or that the individual be re-reviewed in a further one to two years. For individuals undergoing re-review, a recommendation that the academic appointment not be renewed (i.e. that it be terminated) may also be made. These recommendations are provided to the Chair of Medicine for the Chair’s final decision in a letter summarizing the committee’s deliberations, including the rationale for the committee’s recommendation. This decision is communicated in a formal letter to the Dean for final approval.

Notification – May-June

Notification of the results of the review is sent to the candidate's PICs and DDDs.

Appeals Process

Candidates have a right to appeal the decision made. Appeals follow the process outlined in the Procedures Manual for the Policy on Clinical Faculty.

The first stage in the appeal process requires that the clinical faculty member discuss their concerns with the Department Chair in person or by telephone. This must take place within twenty (20) working days of the notification of the decision. A response to the appeal will be returned within ten (10) working days. If it is not resolved at that stage the process continues as outlined in the Policy on Clinical Faculty document.

Post-CFAR

Irrespective of the recommendation, all faculty members are expected to meet in person to review the recommendations with their physician-in-chief, department division director, hospital division head and mentor(s) to implement a further three to five year plan for continued academic and career success.

Current Year’s Timeline

Identifying Candidates List of CFAR candidates sent to PIC Offices on first week of August 2016
Distributing Documentation and Information

Candidates will be notified on August 16th, 2016 of their upcoming review and the required documentation

Candidates should notify the department at dom.cfar@utoronto.ca by September 1st, 2016 if they would like to request deferral of their review for an additional year

A mandatory workshop to help candidates prepare for their review will be held on November 10th, 2016 from 3-5 pm. Please RSVP to dom.cfar@utoronto.ca. The Powerpoint presentation from this workshop along with other resources can be found on the resources page

Collecting Submissions The final submission deadline for the 2017 CFAR is  February 28th, 2017. Late submissions will not be considered. Please see the deadlines page for more information.
Review and Recommendations The recommendations from the CFAR committee are forwarded to the Faculty of Medicine for review the last week of May 2017
Notification Notifications sent to candidates the third week of June 2017
Appeal Deadline Appeals of the decision must initially be made by telephone or in person within twenty (20) working days of receipt of notification of the decision
Back to Top