About Case Materials and Access in RPT
Cases in Interfolio Review, Promotion & Tenure (RPT) contain many different materials that are reviewed by different people at different points in the workflow. These materials may be submitted by candidates, uploaded by committees, requested from external reviewers, or generated internally as part of the review process. RPT organizes case materials to support role‑based access and controlled visibility. This ensures that candidates, committee members, and administrators see only the materials appropriate to their role and the current stage of review. As a case moves forward, materials are preserved and passed along so each review step builds on the same record. Understanding how case materials are categorized and who can access them is essential for managing reviews, responding to candidate questions, and maintaining confidentiality throughout the process.
Remember that anything uploaded by a committee is not seen by a candidate, and committee members are not able to add, reorder, or edit sections and materials.
Changes made to the packet are saved and passed forward to the next committee, which has the same abilities to create and edit packet sections and materials. If a case gets sent back a step, it will retain any changes that have been made to the packet.
Case Material Categories
All materials associated with a case are organized into the following categories. These categories help administrators manage access and determine how materials behave during review.
- Candidate Documents: Documents uploaded by the candidate as part of their packet, such as statements, publications, or supporting materials.
- Candidate Forms: Structured forms completed by the candidate to provide required information or acknowledgements as part of the packet.
- Committee Documents: Materials uploaded by committees or administrators to support review work, such as committee notes, meeting materials, recommendations, or internal documents.
- External Evaluations: Letters or evaluations requested from external reviewers. These materials are typically subject to additional confidentiality controls.
Each material category follows different access rules, which are enforced throughout the workflow based on role permissions and case configuration.
Administrator and Committee Manager Capabilities
Unit Administrators and Committee Managers play a key role in organizing and maintaining case materials throughout the review process. Their capabilities are designed to support review work while preserving candidate ownership of the packet and enforcing confidentiality.
Unit Administrators have the ability to manage the structure and organization of case materials. This includes:
- Renaming default packet sections
- Adding or removing sections
- Categorizing and reordering materials
- Add materials not visible to the candidate (e.g. committee notes, meeting notes, final recommendations)
Committee Managers also have the ability to upload internal materials, not visible to the candidate, to support committee review work.
While administrators and committee managers can organize and add materials, they do not modify candidate‑owned content. Candidate documents and forms remain under candidate control until submitted, and their visibility is governed by workflow configuration and institutional policy.
Common Access Scenarios
The way case materials are shared and restricted can vary depending on institutional policy and the needs of a specific review. The following examples illustrate common scenarios administrators manage when configuring access to case materials.
- In some reviews, institutions want only Unit Administrators or Case Managers to read external evaluations, while allowing committee members to see the candidate’s submitted materials. In this scenario, access to external evaluation documents is restricted, while candidate documents remain visible to the committee during review.
- In other cases, institutions may want to share case materials across multiple committees involved in the workflow. This allows downstream committees to review materials created earlier in the process without duplicating work. Access is granted intentionally so committees can view materials relevant to their review step while preserving confidentiality for restricted documents.
- Some institutions allow candidates to review specific committee materials and submit a response or rebuttal. This is often used when sharing a committee recommendation or evaluative document. In these situations, administrators explicitly share selected materials with the candidate and, when appropriate, enable a file response so the candidate can upload a formal reply.
- There are also scenarios where access needs to be limited to a single document within a category. For example, an institution may allow a committee to read one external evaluation while restricting access to the remaining letters. Administrators can manage access at the individual file level to support these nuanced requirements.
These examples highlight how case material access can be tailored to different review needs while maintaining consistent governance. By configuring access intentionally, administrators ensure that each participant sees only the materials appropriate to their role and stage in the review process.
FAQs: Case Material Access
Who can see and manage case materials?
Access to case materials is controlled by role and workflow stage.
- Unit Administrators, Case Managers, and Committee Managers can manage access to individual files within each material category. This includes determining which materials are visible, downloadable, or shared at different points in the review.
- Candidates can see and interact only with materials that are explicitly visible to them. Materials uploaded by committees are not visible to candidates unless they are intentionally shared according to institutional policy.
- Committee members can view materials assigned to their review step but cannot add, remove, reorder, or edit packet sections or candidate‑owned materials. Committee members also cannot see committee materials created by other committees unless access has been explicitly granted.
These access rules ensure that reviews remain structured, confidential, and aligned with institutional governance.
How does material access change as a case moves forward?
As a case progresses through the review workflow, materials are preserved and passed forward so that each committee reviews the most current version of the record. Changes made to packet sections or materials at one review step remain in place for all subsequent steps.
Committees work from the same evolving packet. If a committee adds materials, updates internal documents, or reorganizes content they have access to, those changes are carried forward to the next committee in the workflow. This ensures continuity and prevents duplicate work as a case advances. If a case is sent back to a previous review step, all changes made to the packet are retained. Materials are not reverted or removed when a case moves backward in the workflow. Instead, the earlier committee sees the packet exactly as it exists at that point in time, including any updates made during later steps.