Annual Reporting & Evaluations

THE PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS (PRD) is a system of performance management that is a mechanism to provide ongoing interaction, recognize good performance, and offer training and development opportunities for UME staff members.

Questions about the PRD review or expectation-setting process should be directed to the ADO office or University Human Resources for links to the appropriate forms and trainings

The 2020 program planning year started a new five-year planning cycle (2020-2024) for University of Maryland Extension. All UME faculty, along with campus-based faculty with extension appointments,  are required to participate in the UME program development and planning, evaluation, and reporting process. 

Sound planning and reporting identifies how Extension programs are directed and what accomplishments and impacts have occurred as a result of these efforts.

Detailed planning and reporting can help maximize limited human and fiscal resources allocated to the development, delivery, and evaluation of Extension educational and teaching efforts.

Impacts and successes of UME programs are necessary as we communicate with the general public and public officials on important budgetary issues discussed in the U.S. Congress, the Maryland General Assembly, and by county/city councils and commissions.

Accountability and program impact information is also shared with our Extension partners across the state and country.

UME receives funds from federal and state appropriations for which there is accountability for both the fiscal expenditures and for what has been achieved with the resources. UME is required to provide an accountability system that documents program outcomes achieved on an annual basis.

Systematic planning and reporting are required of all UME faculty, along with campus-based faculty with extension appointments, to meet Federal program guidelines including, but not limited to the Smith-Lever Act, the Agricultural Research, Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998 (AREERA), and the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA).

Start your IEP

IEP Documentation and Training 

Each year UME faculty are evaluated on their accomplishments in the areas of scholarship, teaching, service. The specific documents* that will are used for the Annual Faculty Review (AFR) process include:

1.     Approved Individual Extension Plan (IEP) for the year under review

2.     University of Maryland Extension Reporting System (UMERS) data

3.     Teaching Effectiveness Data

4.     Curriculum Vitae (CV)

5.     Faculty Self-Evaluation Form

6.     Impact Statement Report

7.     AEDs/BCED and Program Director Input

8.     Enrollment Data (4-H faculty only)

Additionally, there are program specific and University required reporting requirements that UME faculty must complete.  Some of these reports may be used as part of the evaluation process, others are outside of the evaluation process.

• 4-H Enrollment reporting
• Maryland SNAP-Ed reporting
• Maryland Sea Grant Reporting
• Other Federal reporting
• University of Maryland Faculty Activity Reporting
• Outside Professional Activities Reporting

Considerations for Annual Ratings

This summary is an assimilation of performance examples and guiding principles of the Annual Faculty Review (AFR) process and should not be construed as a binding document regarding AFR ratings. This summary is meant to provide some examples of things administrators consider when developing the AFR Rating. It should not be inferred from these examples that all of these must be accomplished in any given year or that an omission of a specific example implies that work may not be relevant. Program leaders and area and city Extension directors work closely together in the process of the annual evaluation.

Faculty have the right to appeal their annual rating.

Appeal Process