4-30: Remediation of Performance: Contract Employees – Policy*

Policy Overview

  1. Except for anonymous allegations, any allegation of unsatisfactory performance shall be investigated immediately to determine if evidence exists to substantiate a major
  2. If substantiation is found, the college shall provide the employee with a written specification of the problem , suggestions for improvement, a timetable for remediation, a description of the subsequent evaluation to take place to detem1ine if substantial progress or improvement has occurred, and possible consequences if remediation does not The college, at its discretion, may place the employee on disciplinary probation during the remediation period. (See Policy 4-39, Reprimand, Suspension, and Dismissal of Contract Employees.)
  3. If substantiation is not found, the allegations shall be expunged from the employee’s re
  4. While the responsibility for improvement rests primarily with the employee, the college recognizes an obligation to suggest how the employee may improve performance and to provide reasonable assistance toward the goal of improvement.

(POLICY APPROVAL:  1-15-02, SFCC Governing Board)


Provides a process for investigating suspected major weaknesses in the performance of contract employees and outlines procedures for remediation.

Legal References or Background

No legal references on this topic were located in New Mexico statutes.


  1. Unsatisfactory Performance Or major weakness in performance is defined as a departure from the acceptable standards of performance established by or for full-time professional employees on contract (i.e., faculty or administrative staff) in fulfilling their job duties or responsibilities as indicated in such documents as employment contracts, job descriptions, employee handbooks, or evaluations plans or the college's formal policies and procedures.


  1. The immediate supervisor, with the guidance of the appropriate Cabinet-level supervisor, is responsible for investigating thoroughly any allegation of unsatisfactory performance.
  2. The supervisor is expected to use proper, relevant, focused, expeditious, and reliable investigative techniques, tools, and procedures to determine if evidence exists to substantiate the allegation.
  3. If substantiating evidence is found indicating that a major weakness may exist, the supervisor schedules a meeting with the employee to review the allegation and to review the suppo1ting evidence for the allegation. The employee is provided with sufficient time to review the information presented and to gather any information that may refute the allegation.
  4. The supervisor schedules a subsequent meeting with the employee to review all available information, evidence, and arguments.
  5. If, after reviewing all evidence and information, the supervisor concludes that the allegation is substantiated, the supervisor drafts a plan for remediation, which is reviewed with the employee before it is finalized.
  6. The supervisor provides the employee with a written document specifying the identified weakness, the remediation plan, and the evaluation technique to be
  7. The supervisor meets with the employee on a periodic and regular basis to review progress of the remediation After each such meeting, both the supervisor and the employee sign a statement documenting that the meeting occurred. The supervisor files one copy with the other documents to the remediation process and gives one copy to the employee for his or her records.
  8. The supervisor conducts a thorough evaluation at the conclusion of the specified time period (or earlier, if mutually acceptable). The results are communicated to the employee in writing concluding that
    1. complete remediation has been achieved, or
    2.  substantial progress has taken place and the identified weakness is being remediated although continued progress is still expected, or
    3.  no substantial progress has been made toward remediation.
  9. Lack of progress toward remediation may subject an employee to disciplinary probation or other disciplina1y action according to the policy and procedures outlined in Policy 4-39, Rep1imand, Suspension, and Dismissal of Contract Employees.


  1. Though the college imposes an obligation upon itself to suggest how an employee may improve perfom1ance and to provide reasonable assistance to the employee who demonstrates a willingness to address the problem and show improvement, the responsibility for performing one’s job satisfactorily resides with the individual employee; and the college is not required to offer remediation in any case in which the employee is uncooperative or demonstrates an unwillingness to acknowledge poor performance or continues performing unsatisfactorily even after the problem has been brought to the employee’s attention or in any case in which the employee’s behavior is judged so egregiously unacceptable as to wa1rnnt immediate disciplinary action up to and including dismissal from
  1. A supervisor who, aware of a problem with an employee, fails to take approp1iate action (including disciplinary action or action to remediate) to address the unacceptable behavior or unsatisfactory performance of an employee for whom he or she is responsible becomes himself or herself subject to disciplinary action or remediation for this
  2. The employee has the tight to file a complaint or grievance according to the procedures in Policy 4-40, Non- renewal, Termination, and Dismissal, if he or she disputes the existence of unsatisfactory performance or feels that he or she has not been treated fairly and in accord with established college policies and



Updated:  815103

Associated Procedures