The faculty performance categorized as Level 4, would include highly effective teaching with continuous updating of course content and delivery. Performance could include instructional development projects offered to peers for critical review. Specific characteristics of a Level 4 teacher include all of the attributes of a Level 2 teaching performance, some of the attributes of a Level 3 performance, and may include, but not be limited to, some or all of the following:

Level 3 teaching performance goes beyond the minimum obligations associated with a faculty appointment. There will be evidence that the faculty member has systematically upgraded the content of courses and has made a conscientious effort to consistently improve the delivery of course material. In addition, an instructor performing at Level 3 shows evidence of attempts to make intellectual contributions in the area of instructional development. Specific characteristics of a Level 3 teacher includes all of the attributes of a Level 2 teacher and may include, but not be limited to, some or all of the following:

Teaching performance at level 2 occurs when a faculty member performs all obligations consistent with the workload option of their faculty appointment. This person performs adequately in the classroom, but may not be deeply involved in continuous improvement programs or in projects involving intellectual contributions to instructional development. Specific characteristics of a Level 2 teaching performance include all of the following:

An individual performing at this level does not conform with the instructional role of a faculty member in the College of Public Affairs and Community Service. Continuing performance at the unsatisfactory level will be detrimental to prospects for tenure and will be considered during a post-tenure review proceeding. Level 1 performance is indicated when a faculty member is deficient in one or more of the specific characteristics for Level 2 (Adequate) performance.

To properly evaluate instructional performance, the PAC must have pertinent documentation. Any accomplishments not supported by documentation will not be considered. Documentation will include but is not limited to the following:

Internal evaluation of teaching performance must include but not be limited to student evaluations (see p. 4). External assessment may be in the form of an award or some other type of recognition. Documentation at a minimum will include:

Each faculty member is required to submit evidence of instructional development. Examples of documentation include:

The faculty member must provide evidence of proper conduct of classes and any teaching innovations or course improvement projects implemented. Such evidence will include:

The faculty must provide, minimally, a description of the projects/activities of students whom he/she mentored and the name of students (except in cases where confidentiality could be compromised). The products of mentored activities/projects are perhaps the ideal documentation of the teacher's mentoring/advising efforts. Advising/mentoring includes formally designated roles such as undergraduate advisor or faculty advisor for student club and informal, and sometimes more demanding, activities such as working with students on field projects. Advising logs, lab notes, products of the activities are examples of evidence required to document student advising and mentoring.

Scholarship and creative activity serve as the embodiment of the role of the university faculty member. In most cases, PACS faculty will make their contributions via scholarship so that Ascholarship@ is used as the generic term in this document. However, use of that term does not preclude creative scholarly and professional activities. PACS faculty are not only expected to function as competent scholars but the School looks for all major faculty activities to have a scholarly base.

Faculty scholarship refers to a variety of scholarly activities, the full fruition of which includes dissemination among the community of scholars. Within PACS, scholarship includes the scholarship of discovery ("What is to be known, what is yet to be found?") scholarship of integration ("What do various findings mean when synthesized in some way?"), and scholarship of application or practice ("How can knowledge be responsibly applied to consequential problems?")--including the scholarship associated with development and assessment of teaching. The desired outcome of the scholarly process is dissemination of scholarly work for the benefit of the profession, the discipline, practitioners, or the lay community. Generally, any level of performance will include activities, performance, and products from that level as well as lower (and sometimes higher) levels.

Each faculty member is required to submit copies of all published material or a letter of final acceptance and material presented at academic conferences.

A Level 5 scholarly performance would be characterized as extraordinary on the basis of the quality and quantity of scholarly products. A scholar performing at this extraordinary level would be involved in an ongoing program of research (applied, basic, theoretical/ philosophical) characterized by a yearly record of publication. Specific characteristics of a Level 5 performance, over a 3-year period may include (but are not necessarily limited to) some or all of the following:

! multiple journal articles in refereed journals;

! research award from national body;

LEVEL 4: Very Good

A Level 4 scholarly performance is considered to be well above average. External validation of efforts, through publication or presentations, indicate that the individual is making a contribution to his/her discipline or field. A faculty member performing at Level 4 will likely have accomplished many of the achievements characteristic of Levels 2 and 3. Specific characteristics of Level 4 scholarly performance may include, but not be limited to, some or all of the following:

! short monograph;

! multiple journal articles in refereed journals;

! formal instructional products organized for publication;

! publishing in high quality lay periodicals;

Level 3 scholarly performance goes beyond the minimum obligations associated with a faculty appointment. Scholarship may include ongoing activities of basic or applied research and/or application. Specific characteristics of a Level 3 scholar may include, but not be limited to, some or all of the following:

! publishing in non-refereed journals or lay periodicals;

A Level 2 scholarly performance is that which is minimally acceptable for a faculty member in the College of Public Affairs and Community Service. Performance is adequate and is evidenced by ongoing contributions to research and intellectual activity that peers believe to be worthy of publication. Specific characteristics of a Level 2 performance may include, but not be limited to, some or all of the following:

! contributing to research of another faculty member;

The Level 1 scholar fails to meet minimum expectations for adequate intellectual contribution for a faculty member in the College of Public Affairs and Community Service. Improvements in both quality and quantity of research effort is required. Continuing performance at the unsatisfactory level will be detrimental to prospects for tenure and will be considered during a post-tenure review proceeding.

To properly evaluate scholarly performance, the PAC must have pertinent documentation. Any accomplishments not supportable by documentation will not be considered. Documentation may include letters of acceptance and actual copies of all materials including: (a) work in progress, submitted research, published research; (b) conference paper submissions or acceptances; c) research grant applications; (d) scholarly books/monographs; e) descriptions of projects in the community accompanied by products of the effort. For research publications, the PAC will normally award credit based on the date of publication. However, a letter of final acceptance could be used as documentation.

Faculty members in the College of Public Affairs and Community Service are expected both to be good citizens of the University, School, and unit and to engage in outreach activities beyond the institution. Important aspects of the faculty member's responsibilities are service to the institution; to the professional organizations in the faculty's discipline; and to the community and the general public. Service to the University, School, and unit is in the form of participation in the activities necessary for any organization to operate, such as committee and task force assignments. Service to the profession includes working as an officer, on committees and commissions, attendance at meetings, etc. Service to the community and the public includes serving both in a pro bono capacity and consulting with another institution, business, government agency, or organization. PACS encourages pro bono and paid consulting as evidence that faculty are valued by the marketplace, although such consulting is not required nor is it by itself sufficient for service. Generally, any level of performance will include activities, performance, and products from that level as well as lower levels. (The faculty member is reminded that University rules prohibit the use of state equipment, etc. for non-state activities.)

A Level 5 faculty performance would be characterized by an extraordinarily high level of service to the University, the member's profession, and the public. The faculty member will have served professional organizations as a major officer and/or have served in leadership roles of highly active committees or boards. Specific characteristics of a faculty member achieving Level 5 include the attributes of Level 2, probably some of the attributes of levels 3 and 4, and may include, but not be limited to, some or all of the following:

! president of a national organization;

! designing and initiate a new degree program.

A Level 4 faculty performance would be characterized by a very high level of service to the University, the profession, and the public. The faculty will have served professional organizations by serving as an officer, served the University by being on the University Senate, or serving for extended periods on working committees, task forces, and/or other projects. Specific characteristics of a Level 4 service performance would include the attributes of Level 2, probably some of the attributes of Level 3, and may include, but not be limited to, some or all of the following:

! election to and service on the faculty senate;

! service as editor of newsletter for a professional organization;

! extensive service to public organizations;

! service as unit area coordinator;

! exceptional consulting related to one's discipline;

! design and initiation of new academic concentration;

The performance of a faculty member at Level 3 would exhibit a moderate amount of work on committees and task forces, a moderate role in professional organizations, and a moderate amount of participation in consulting and service to the public. A Level 3 rating must include the attributes of Level 2 (and may include some level 4 achievements). Level 3 performance may include, but not be limited to, some or all of the following:

! service as paper discussant or session chair at a conference;

! service on public commissions or advisory boards;

The member performing at this level would accomplish those professional duties expected as a minimum of any faculty. These are:

! regular attendance at departmental faculty meetings;

! occasional consulting in one's professional discipline;

The faculty member at this level is not meeting the minimum expectations of the service role of a faculty, as expressed in Level 2. Continuing performance at the unsatisfactory level will be detrimental to prospects for tenure and will be considered during a post-tenure review proceeding.

Documentation for the items varies. The necessary information may include: titles of offices, levels of organizations, dates and type of service to public organizations, membership and role on committees (including the scope of the committee and frequency of meeting). In any event, the documentation should be sufficient for a person not familiar with the member's contribution to make a judgment as to what level of service the activity justifies.

Every College of Public Affairs and Community Service faculty member must conform to the standards of professional integrity, professional ethics, and membership in the scholarly community listed in the University Faculty Handbook, specifically the chair and committee must be convinced,

While these qualities are not Ascored@ like the traditional evaluative categories of teaching effectiveness, scholarship and creative activity, and service, they are fundamental to the faculty role and are a significant determinant in the granting and continuation of tenure. Evidence of assessment of these qualities is mandatory at least annually for tenure-track faculty members.

The policies that follow pertain to the College of Public Affairs and Community Service and are to be used in the formulation of school and unit decisions regarding recommendations for promotion and tenure.

Decisions on promotion and tenure will be made on the faculty member's cumulative professional record with emphasis on the period since any previous promotion. To that end, it is incumbent on the faculty member to maintain files of documentation that are required to demonstrate his/her qualifications. It is suggested that these files be established at the very outset of the probationary or review period to facilitate the processes required by the university to evaluate the faculty member's record of performance. Each member who is a candidate for promotion and/or tenure is expected to be thoroughly familiar with all university, school, and unit policies and procedures regarding promotion and tenure.

Recommendations for promotion and/or tenure can be made only after a faculty member has been associated with the university for a sufficient amount of time to demonstrate his/her capabilities as a member of the UNT community. For that reason, except in the rare case when a faculty comes with tenure, the policy of the school is that non-administrative appointments will be made in the unit for a probationary period of no less than three years, the third of which would be the evaluation year, regardless of a prospective faculty member=s prior experience.

University policy dictates that decisions for promotion to Associate Professor and tenure are generally joint decisions and that untenured faculty must maintain a workload balanced among teaching, scholarship, and service. Recommendations for promotion and tenure include an explanation of why the candidate is recommended, including an indication of why the candidate is deemed to be outstanding in either teaching or scholarship and adequate in the other categories.

The guidelines listed below are established in light of university policy. If for some reason, however, the decision is whether to grant tenure for an Associate Professor or to promote to the rank of Associate a previously tenured professor, the following guidelines would still apply.

As stated in the UNT Faculty Handbook, quality teaching is a minimum expectation for the granting of tenure and for promotion. To qualify for tenure and/or the rank of Associate Professor, the candidate must have demonstrated teaching effectiveness in the classroom and in related instructional activities. The evaluation of a candidate=s teaching effectiveness includes consideration of planning and organization, preparation of materials, development of meaningful student activities, level of student achievements or products, and student and peer evaluations. A faculty member should strive for consistent teaching evaluations of Level 3 or better.

As stated in the UNT Faculty Handbook, faculty must show continuing growth through research or writing or other creative activities, and through participation in the professional activities of the discipline. Quality as well as quantity of effort must be judged. Scholarship in the College of Public Affairs and Community Service is conceived in terms of the university's designation as a metropolitan as well as a research university. Scholarly activities are broadly conceived but they result in products that are disseminated beyond the university. Scholarly activities include grant development and the publication and presentation of the results of research and community service projects in appropriate journals, reports, books, or at national and international meetings. While setting specific numerical requirements regarding scholarship is fraught with danger, an expected level of publication would be an average of one scholarly publication per year of sufficient quality that it merits positive peer acknowledgment during a six year probationary period. In some instances, the requirement could be as few as five or as many as seven or more depending on the publication requirements of the faculty=s discipline and the nature of the publications (for example length of data collection requirements, number of studies included in a single publication, etc.). The number that is adequate will depend on the quality of the scholarship as evaluated by a jury of peers. Collaborative work is encouraged and is in the best tradition of a community of scholars. However, candidates must provide evidence of their individual contribution to collaborative scholarly products. The candidate must be a Category II or III member of the Graduate Faculty.

The faculty member should be actively involved in the affairs of the unit and school and should render service to the university, the community at large, and their professional organizations. Good internal citizenship as well as community outreach are expectations of PACS faculty. A score above 2 is expected to help fulfill the mission of the School.

According to university policy, it is possible for a faculty member to be promoted to Professor on any of the three workload tracks described in the section on Workload Options-- a balance among teaching, research, and service; an emphasis on research with more limited teaching and service; or teaching and service. In any case, a sustained record of productivity consistent with the workload emphasis is required for promotion. The policies of the College of Public Affairs and Community Service reflect these tracks, including expectations in the service area that are somewhat more stringent than in the case of the service factor as related to decisions on tenure and/or promotion to Associate Professor. It is important that Professors in the College of Public Affairs and Community Service are involved in their school, their profession, and their community. Sustained quality in teaching is also required. It should be reiterated that most faculty members will be on Option I, the balanced load, since it is difficult to sustain either of the other loads in small departments; doing so is a matter of negotiation, not merely the faculty member=s selection.

Because a faculty member has met the requirements for Associate Professor does not relieve the faculty member from demonstrating a high level of teaching performance. Consequently, a recommendation for promotion to Professor requires evidence that the candidate has had consistent evaluations of Level 3 with at least occasional evaluations of Level 4 or better during the review period using the departmental merit evaluation document.

A faculty member who elects this track is expected to remain productive in scholarly activity throughout his/her tenure on this track. Scholarship is here meant to imply a broad range of scholarly activities that includes but is not limited to seeking and obtaining funding and/or community support for research and applied projects; conducting research and reporting results at academic conferences and in scholarly publications; developing, implementing, and evaluating community based projects and reporting results in academic conferences and in scholarly publications; developing and evaluating instructional techniques and reporting results at academic conferences and in scholarly publications. Scholarly publications include academic journals, books, and monographs; academic conferences include state, regional, national, and international conferences and meetings. Collaborative work is encouraged and is in the best traditions of a community of scholars; however, candidates must provide evidence that corroborates their individual contribution to jointly developed and authored scholarship. The candidate must be a Category II or III member of the Graduate Faculty. For promotion to professor in the balanced track, scholarship should be maintained at Level 3 or above.

Professional activities directly related to the faculty member's participation in a community of scholars can include editorship of an academic journal, serving on editorial boards or as a reviewer for scholarly journals, participating on outside review committees for programs at other universities, development of the discipline through participation on licensing boards, and other such activities that signify contribution to the development of the faculty member's discipline. All such activities and their outcomes must be documented.

It is expected that each faculty member will be involved in some level of University, School, unit, professional and/or public service and that the candidate for promotion to professor will consistently perform at Level 3 or higher according to the unit merit evaluation document..

A faculty member seeking promotion to Professor based on teaching and service is expected to perform at very high levels in the teaching area. To qualify for consideration, the faculty member must have served at least six consecutive academic years in the university's Option 2 (teaching emphasis) workload option. During those six years, the candidate must have taught a minimum average of eight regularly scheduled courses per academic year (or the equivalent). In addition commitment to teaching must be demonstrated through significant mentoring and/or advising. The faculty member=s performance must have been rated at Level 4 or above in the teaching category during each of those years. It is expected also that the candidate will have compiled a significant record of intellectual contributions in the area of instructional development.

If the candidate for promotion chooses to be involved in scholarship, he/she should do so with the understanding that such activity does not alter the minimum expectations in the areas of Teaching or Service. The candidate's cumulative publication record must meet the requirements of this category for promotion to Associate Professor.

It is expected that each faculty member will be involved in some level of university, professional, and/or public service. Those faculty seeking promotion to Professor on the basis of Teaching and Service, however, are expected to demonstrate a higher level of service, as measured by the unit merit evaluation document, than candidates in other promotion/tenure categories. Specifically, the candidate for promotion to Professor on the Teaching/Service track should consistently perform at Level 4 or higher according to the unit merit evaluation document. The candidate must have served with distinction on University and School committees and have contributed significantly to meeting the goals of his/her unit. In addition, service to the community is expected, for example (but not limited to) by coordinating collaborative projects, student advising not directly related to teaching (student organizations, etc.), uncompensated consultation/workshops/seminars for members of the community, and public appearances in the media. Service to the discipline may include serving as chair for symposia/academic conferences, or on committees in professional associations.

An individual in Option 3 teaches fewer courses than faculty members in the other tracks, but teaching effectiveness is still a requirement. At a minimum, the individual must be ranked as adequate (Level 2) in teaching to achieve promotion.

The individual who opts for this track and seeks promotion is expected to be a star in the scholarly realm, garnering grants, making presentations, succeeding in seeing his or her work in print in both conventional scholarly media and in venues that complement the applied mission of the College of Public Affairs and Community Service. Promotion requires a consistent scholarly rating above Level 4.

An individual who is on the primarily research track can limit his or her service but cannot neglect service obligations altogether. The evaluation of service must be at least at Level 2.

The faculty member seeking promotion to any rank must have a spirit of follow institutional policies on professional behavior, as defined by the Faculty Handbook in Appendix 2, section 2.20000 as follows:

The most critical and immediate need for continuation is a teaching performance at least at Level 2. Other standards are spelled out in the following section with regard to work loads. In the event that a faculty member in the College of Public Affairs and Community Service is considered by the PAC during its annual merit evaluation deliberations to fall short of the threshold or continuing requirements in the performance areas pertinent to a particular workload option, that individual may be given a one year development period to meet the threshold requirements of that option. Tenured faculty will enter in the post-tenure review/continuing evaluation of tenured faculty process outlined in the Faculty Handbook. The University and the School reserve the right for dismissal for cause at any time. Failing to meet at least a Level 2 of teaching shall constitute Acause.@

To be continued all faculty members must meet the following standards:

In accordance with university policy as stated in the Faculty Handbook, probationary faculty will be evaluated each academic year. This evaluation will be made by unit chairs, will consider the evaluation of peers on unit PAC's, and will be submitted to the dean. If a unit P&T committee exists, the recommendations of that committee will be incorporated in the evaluation submitted by the unit chair unless the unit chair's and unit P&T committee's recommendation differs. In such a case the unit P&T will attach a statement to the Evaluation Form, specifying reasons for the unit P&T's recommendation. A statement regarding the faculty member's professional integrity, ethics, and understanding of the nature of membership in the community of scholars should be included each year.

In addition, the College of Public Affairs and Community Service PAC Committee will conduct a performance review of probationary faculty during the middle year of appointment that is more extensive than the annual evaluations. This review will consider the probationary faculty member's cumulative record on teaching, research, and service and result in a recommendation regarding continuation of appointment. While the mid-term performance review will consider all aspects of the probationary faculty member's cumulative performance, special attention will be given to the annual evaluations comprising the written record (e.g., unit PAC/chair merit rankings/annual review form, three-year annual update. For example, if the probationary faculty member was considered to be "making adequate progress" toward tenure in each of the first two years and is considered to be "making progress" in the third, a decision to continue appointment would be expected. If the annual evaluations indicate lack of progress in the first two years and progress in the third year is not significantly improved, a recommendation not to reappoint would be expected. If the record for the first three years is mixed, making progress some years and little progress in others, the recommendation regarding reappointment will be made by the unit chair, in consultation with the dean and with the advice and counsel of the PACS PAC. If continuation is recommended, a fourth year evaluation by the PACS PAC is likely. Individuals on shorter tenure tracks will be reviewed in appropriately shorter intervals.

A recommendation to reappoint a probationary faculty member based on the mid-term performance review is recognition of the unit's and the School's confidence that the probationary faculty member has the capability to earn a favorable recommendation for tenure at the end of the probationary period. A recommendation to reappoint after the mid-term performance review, however, is in no way a guarantee that the unit or School will recommend tenure at the end of the probationary period. That decision will be heavily influenced by the faculty member's performance during the later years of the probationary period.

Evaluation by the unit PAC, chair (and unit P&T Committee where there is one) must be based on consistent criteria. A completed copy of the unit PAC/Chair/(unit P&T) Evaluation Form, included in this document, is given to the faculty member during the annual review with the chair and a copy is provided to the dean. When used for probationary faculty, the recommendation for reappointment must be included in the text.

The performance of all faculty will be evaluated each year in accordance with PACS policy. Thus, the unit PAC chair and unit chair will sign each form each year. For the unit chair, the evaluation is signed by the unit PAC chair and forwarded to the dean. In addition, the unit P&T Committee will sign if appropriate. A faculty member's signature on this form means that the faculty member has met with the unit chair and received his/her annual evaluation. The faculty member's signature does not signify agreement with the evaluation but it does signify that he/she has reviewed that evaluation.

In cases where the PACS PAC makes recommendations regarding promotion, tenure and mid-term reappointments, the PACS PAC's statement will be attached to the Evaluation Form and forwarded to the dean with other required materials.

Workload Option Policies

One of the goals of the College of Public Affairs and Community Service is to allow individual faculty the maximum opportunity to enhance professional development to the greatest possible extent. Of equal importance is the goal to create a program of instruction that meets the needs of the students. The faculty of the College of Public Affairs and Community Service believe these two goals to be compatible. To facilitate the accomplishment of our goals, the school will employ the University's three option workload policy. Each tenured faculty member=s workload option and each tenure-track faculty member=s percentage of effort will be negotiated annually (or up to a three-year period) by the faculty member and the chair, considering the teaching needs of the unit, and approved by the dean. Exceptions to the following university policy must be negotiated annually between a unit chair and the dean. Documentation of agreements will become part of an individual's personnel file.

Unit directors/chairs in the College of Public Affairs and Community Service are considered as half-time faculty for the purpose of faculty performance evaluations. The dean, with input from the department, will evaluate the administrative portion. Other PACS faculty members (e.g. director of Survey Research Center or TIREA) may also be considered part time faculty for purposes of evaluation. Such faculty should establish, by agreement with their unit director and the dean, that percentage of their workload that consists of faculty responsibilities. Each of these faculty members should be evaluated by the PAC according to the faculty portion of their workload. Thus, quantity of research, teaching and service (excluding administrative responsibilities) expected, for example, of a unit director/chair would be half that expected of a full time faculty member. The same level of quality would be expected.

All probationary, tenure track faculty must have a balance of teaching and research (Option 1). The determination of a particular option for each tenured faculty member is ultimately the prerogative of the dean, who reviews the faculty member's strengths, career aspirations, and the needs of the school, and who considers recommendations of the unit chairs and needs of the department. The continuity and consistency of workload assignments can be enhanced by a formal structure to guide the dean, the Chairs, and the faculty in their assessment of faculty roles.

Lecturers and those in lecture type positions are to be evaluated according to Option 2.

The requirements stated below for the three workload options are intended to serve as guidelines only. The faculty member must negotiate with the dean and the unit as to the specific requirements for each option as well as the availability of any option other than the first.

Requirements for reappointment follow this section.

To participate in Option 1, a tenured faculty member will continue teaching a minimum of five lecture or seminar courses (or the equivalent) per year. The faculty member will demonstrate continuing productivity in scholarship and publication. For faculty tenured more than a year in the past, evidence of success might be a regular record of publication or professional presentations during the past three-year evaluation period. (See Faculty Reappointment Requirements later).

Continuation in Option 1 is dependent upon continued productivity in scholarship and quality teaching at least at Level 2 for tenured faculty. Untenured faculty must achieve a Level 4 ranking in teaching or research and Level 2 in the other, or, earlier in their careers, evidence of the potential to achieve such levels.

Workload Option 2 requires that the faculty member consistently teach a minimum of the equivalent of 8 courses each academic year (excluding summer) and make diligent efforts to upgrade instructional effectiveness and make improvements in course and program content and that the faculty member play a vital role in both the citizenship and outreach aspects of service. Scholarship performance in this category usually pertains to contributions to pedagogy.

Continuation in Option 2 requires that the faculty member demonstrate an aptitude for teaching and a willingness to exert time and effort in the continuous improvement of that function. These can be demonstrated by consistent performance at level 3 or better on the Teaching Factor of the departmental evaluation document. Teaching activities would extend beyond the classroom in mentoring, advising, and other teaching related activities. In addition, a minimal score on service for continuation in this track would be above a 2.

This option should be reserved for those faculty who are truly outstanding in the quality and quantity of their scholarly output. Consequently, to participate in this option, the faculty member should have demonstrated grantsmanship and consistently high levels of publication. In addition, the faculty member must teach a minimum of the equivalent of three lecture courses a year and engage in some service activities.

If the faculty member is to continue participating in Option 3, a consistent record of successful academic scholarship, grantsmanship, and continued high levels of publication is necessary above Level 3. Teaching and service should be maintained at least at Level 2.

Checklist for Participants in the Review Process

Faculty Responsibilities

1) Current Vita

! Serves by request as advisory committee to the dean.

Over the last three years, Dr. Childfair has: