May 19, 2005

Dear John,

Raises were allocated in the following way:

(1) In addition to committing funds to one faculty
member as part of a retention package ($9966), the 
committee agreed to an additional $10k for adjustments
distributed to five faculty in order to address 
specific salary inequities.

(2) The remaining funds were distributed on the
basis of merit using a formula that is a linear
function of the overall merit evaluation score.
On a graph of raise versus score, the formula 
includes a $500 "y-intercept" and a slope determined
so that the total funds disbursed equals the
funds available. The slope used for a particular
faculty member is expressed as a percentage, determined 
from the evaluation score, multiplied by the current 
salary. If y(i) is raise for faculty i:

	y(i) = y0 + salary(i) * percent(eval(i))

where y0= $500, "salary" is current salary in dollars,
"eval" is the evaluation score, and percent depends
linearly on the evaluation score.

An additional constraint is that no one would receive 
a raise below about 1%. Of the faculty who did not 
receive adjustments, raises ranged from 1% to 2.65%.

(3) There were several exceptions to the above scheme.
Buxkemper, Wagner, and Weis-Taylor were given straight
2.5% raises. The faculty receiving the retention package
was awarded just the funds earmarked for retention.

Sincerely,
Mike Ritzwoller
Physics Evaluation Committee, Chair