Below are some practices for principal investigator/mentor's evaluation of a postdoc employee.

At the beginning of each appointment, the principal investigator/mentor should provide the postdoctoral appointees with their performance expectations for the position. This should include any expectations for effort allocation, productivity, teaching or research methods, and communication requirements. The principal investigator/mentor should also provide the criteria on which any job performance evaluation will be made, such as frequency and timing of performance evaluations. 

Annual performance evaluations are an important management tool that provide a timely, structured, and systematic method of communicating essential performance-related feedback. Principal investigators/mentors are strongly encouraged to conduct performance evaluations with postdoctoral appointees on an annual basis. Principal investigators/mentors should consult with their local human resources representative regarding performance evaluation best practices.

1. The appointee should be evaluated based upon criteria solely related to their performance of duties, skills, and professional development. Forms and criteria used for performance evaluations may vary by college/unit. Each college/unit may develop its own standard scale for evaluating appointees. The evaluation form shall include an overall assessment of the appointee's performance.
2. The evaluator should review all evaluations with appointees. The appointee should sign the evaluation form to indicate that the evaluation has been discussed with the appointee and that the appointee has received a copy of the evaluation. The signature of the appointee does not necessarily mean that the appointee agrees with the evaluation. Appointees shall have five (5) working days to provide a written response to or comments on their evaluations. Such response and/or comments shall be attached to the evaluation.