Subappendix A: Checklist for Geisel or New Faculty Member Being Considered for Appointment/Promotion to Associate Professor through the APT Committee

This document should be used in conjunction with documents entitled, “Academic Appointments, Promotions and Titles at The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth” and “APT Guidelines and Structure.”

To download a fillable PDF click here

All documents will be uploaded to a restricted site. Only one copy of each is therefore required.

Candidate’s Name:___________________

Curriculum Vitae (CV):

  • Must be in the Geisel format, current and dated.

Career Overview:

  • This is part of the CV. It must be written by the candidate.

Research Funding:

  • This is part of the CV.
    • For grants, list past awards, current awards, and pending proposals, with the information requested. Do not provide information on unsuccessful proposals.
    • If no information is provided in CV, it will be assumed that there is no research support.

Formal Teaching Evaluations*:

  • Reviews and quantitative metrics for all formal (i.e., not individual mentoring) UME, GME, associate provider and graduate student teaching, and undergraduate teaching when applicable. Do not include information on faculty members other than candidate. Dean's office recognizes not all courses provide formal metrics:  All available metrics need to be included.

Narrative Evaluations from Learners or Mentees (Students, Fellows, Residents, Junior Faculty)*:

  • At least 10 evaluations.

Lists of Outside Reviewers:

  • For Reviewers selected by the Chair, provide a single page that indicates
    • Reviewers’ names, ranks, institutional affiliations, and contact information.
  • For Reviewers selected by the Candidate, provide a single page that indicates
    • Reviewers’ names, ranks, institutional affiliations, and contact information.

Minimum of Five (5) Letters from Outside Reviewers: Departments must provide a list of the external reviewers identified as “Chosen by Chair” and “Chosen by Candidate.” List needs to identify name, institution and rank of reviewer (vide infra).

  • The letters must be on letterhead, dated, with original signature and indicating the rank of the reviewer.
  • Unless otherwise approved, letters must be within 1 year of date of APT review.
  • Reviewer must be of the same or higher rank as the candidate’s proposed rank (Associate Professor or equivalent). Must not be a modified title.
  • Letters cannot be from individuals who have a conflict of interest with the candidate (e.g., close relative, business partner, etc.).
  • At least half of all letters on both the Chair's and on the candidate's lists must be free from other conflicts (e.g., publishing with candidate) as described in Appendix 5.
  • Of the required minimum of five outside letters, three must come from individuals selected by the Chair. If individual is on the candidate's list, that person cannot also be on the Chair's list.
  • More than five letters may be solicited; departments may indicate which letters meet the requirements above (i.e., majority from Chair/at least half free from conflict), however all letters (even if there are more than five) must be submitted with portfolio.

Two (2) Letters from Peers:

  • Letters should be from current peers (i.e., at the same institution where the candidate holds a position; or for recent senior recruits, their immediately prior institution). Peer reviewers should hold a ladder faculty position (i.e., Assistant Professor, Associate Professor or Professor or equivalent).  While peer reviewers do not need to be at the same rank for which the candidate is being considered, and they may hold a prefixed appointment (e.g., Clinical Associate Professor), they do need to be able to have understanding of the criteria for rank that would allow them to assess if the candidate has met those criteria.

Chair’s Letter (to Dean):

  • Original must be on letterhead and signed. An electronic version is acceptable, but the signature should not be electronic, copied or stamped (i.e., a scan of the original letter should be submitted).
  • The first paragraph should indicate the Faculty Line (Tenure-track/Tenure, AMS, or Non-tenure) and track (e.g., Investigator-Scholar), if the promotion is being considered with tenure (Tenure-track/Tenure Faculty Line, DC paymaster only), and the fractional FTE committed to each relevant activity (teaching, research, service, administration).
    • Secondary Chair letter, necessary only if there is a joint appointment.
      • Section Chief and Tertiary Chair letters, when applicable (optional).

Department Committee Results:

  • Date of Departmental Committee Action
  • Vote tally on the motion recommending portfolio move forward to APT Committee (Yea, Nay, Abstain, Total)
  • Confirmation that the numbers present met quorum (50% of committee membership)


  • Provide a list of weblinks to 3-5 publications that the candidate designates as their most significant

 Completed DAB form:

  • The Dean's Office will upload the appropriate DAB form to SharePoint.


*Note: Some faculty members in the Non-tenure Faculty Line or the Investigator-Scholar Track of the AMS Faculty Line may not have interactions with learners. These requirements are optional for those who do not have these responsibilities. In addition, faculty being considered for appointment at Associate Professor may not be able to provide such data from their former institution.  Portfolios should contain all material relevant to learner evaluations that is available.