Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

eDossier is a contribution to KPME from Indiana University. The system was built on requirements gathered by Vice Provost for Faculty & Academic Affairs - Bloomington.


This page is indented to outline the initial, general requirements for an IU development eDossier application. The current process involves volumes of paper be passed around from reviewer to reviewer with the physical copies being created at each step. The development of an eDossier application is intended to reduce the amount of paper copies being created and moved around as well as improving the flow of the review process.

General Requirements

  • Electronic collection of data - The current process involves the faculty or the department to create paper copies of required dossier materials. Once each reviewer level is finished, these materials are then physically moved to the next level of review. This has led to the practices of dossiers being reviewed in batches. Electronic collection would dramatically cut down on the number of paper copies being created as well as allowing reviewers to pass along dossiers as they are finished instead of in batches.
  • System should be an enterprise level application - this system should be developed for use by the entire university complex and not for one department or campus. However, specific requirements may vary from school to school and the application should be flexible enough to accommodate basic needs.
  • Multiple users requiring near 24/7 access - access of this type would allow faculty and reviewers (both internal and external) greater flexibility to perform their necessary tasks as well as potentially moving the process away from batch reviews to just in time.

Faculty Front End

  • File uploads must be easy and conducive to the working environment and habits of our faculty. By going to electronic collection, the faculty will need a front end that is easy to access and understand. Additionally the document will need to guide them to upload the necessary documents for Dossier requirements.
  • *Ability for faculty to update their dossier at any time during the year. The idea is that updates and changes could be completed at any time up until the deadline of submitting a final version of their dossier for review.
  • After submission, only additions. The current process only allows users to add new materials after submission, no revisions or removal of already submitted materials.
  • Comments Faculty should be provided a section in the document to provide brief comments on the materials. This should be allowed with each attachment as well as an overall comment.
  • Accessibility for future Reviews - Two phases are part of the P&T process, promotion and tenure. Those that have been through the promotion process using an application would want to be able to reuse materials from that process for the Tenure process. The system would need to recognize which phase of the process is being done as the required materials vary.

Routing & Review Process

  • The new electronic document form will allow delegation of authority in the workflow process. Delegation should be available at the approval level only. This will allow the processing of the documents at the chair and/or dean level to flow smoothly.
  • Secure environment that ensures confidentiality in the comments added at each level of review. Dossier reviewers add comments throughout the process that are to be viewed by only those up the reporting structure which varies from unit to unit. The new electronic application must ensure that these comments are secured and not available to anyone other than the appropriate reviewers.
  • External letters are solicited from folks outside IU. This would need to be considered from a security standpoint since the current application lives behind CAS. Based on the School, the Dean's Office or Departments receive the letters so it could be that any consideration of security is needed and that the department would upload the letters to the person's record. Tools for department level admins need to be provided for these situations or to make notes about the availability of physical hard copies.
  • External Review/Access - a systematic way of allowing external to IU users limited access to pieces of the dossier is desired. This, however, will not be included in the first release.
  • Use of Kuali Rice for routing the document through the process. The exact structure may vary based on the size of the department, so the routing should be flexible enough to accommodate this. Multiple approvals at a given level may be required before the document routes on.
  • Review committees vary by department. We would need to provide tools to departments/schools/campus to maintain who can review the dossier.
  • Some cases may be joint department (split appointment). Need accommodate parallel routing of cases.
  • No labels