Steps in the Accreditation Cycle A Collaboration Effort:

The United Negro College Fund and The Commission on Colleges

Presented by: Rudolph S. Jackson, UNCF Lead Consultant for FASTAP February 14, 2014

1

Objectives for today’s Session  Participants will: Understand the orientation differences between UNCF and SACSCOC  Appreciate some of the fundamental components necessary for a successful SACSCOC review  Appreciate the rationale for a Fifth-Year Interim Review  Develop strategies for avoiding missteps in compliance reporting 2

Strategic Focus

Student Learning SACSCOC UNCF

Peer Review Capacity Building 3

An Emphasis on Compliance

(Accreditation Reviews)

Resources -Institutional Mission Financial support -Expertise and technical know-how -Personnel and student services -Governance Traditional Emphasis on Compliance and unit-level effectiveness Procedures and Activities -O perating and policy procedures -Organization and reporting structures 4

Tracing a Shift to Outcomes Review

Resources -Institutional Mission Financial support -Expertise technical know-how -Personnel and student services -Governance Procedures and Activities -O perating/policy procedures -Organization and reporting structures Outcomes Student Learning -Knowledge -Skills -Behavioral Patterns Traditional Emphasis on Compliance and unit-level effectiveness Emerging Refinements in Regional Accreditation 5

FASTAP Initiative

(Financial and Strategic Technical Assistance Program)  Addressing Accreditation Issues  Establishing Institutional Priorities  Developing Workable Strategies for improvements 6

Getting Started (Planning Fundamentals)  Understand the reaffirmation process  Document the Compliance Certification  Explore the COC Website involving updates/policies www.sacscoc.org

 Review the Resource Manual prepared by COC 7

Getting Started Cont’d  Attend planned COC Sessions (e.g. annual meeting/orientation)  Review and discuss peer institutional experiences  Explore observer opportunities on visiting committees 8

Understanding The Reaffirmation Process Orientation (>2 yrs before reaffirmation) Advisory visit (optional) Compliance Certification (Off-site Review) Focused Report Reaffirmation Committee (On-site Review) Response Report (for COC Review) Fifth-Year/Interim Report 9

Fielding The Right Team

 Organize for success  Establish timetables and reporting schedules  Share the vision for completing the certification document  Determine visual formats  Maintain close ties with tech staff 10

Leadership Team

Compliance Coordinator with direct access to CEO -ISSUE AREAS • • • • Faculty Curriculum Administration and Governance Technical/Presentation • Finance • Other Institutional Resources and Information 11

Why a Fifth-Year Interim Review Process?

 Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA) – Reg 602.19(b) Speaks to accrediting agencies monitoring their accredited institutions to ensure ongoing compliance.

– Reg 602.22(c)(2) Calls for accrediting agencies having an effective mechanism for conducting, at reasonable intervals, visits to additional locations of institutions that operate more than three additional locations.

– There are variances in review cycles among accrediting bodies.

12

5 Most Cited Standards for the Fifth Year Over the Past 4 Years 1. CS 3.3.1.1 Institutional Effectiveness: Educational Programs, to include Student Learning Outcomes — 49% 2. CR 2.8 Number of Full-time Faculty —41% 3. CS 3.4.11 Qualified Academic Coordinators —31% 4. FR 4.5 Student Complaints —26% 5. CS 3.13.3 Complaint Record —24% 13

COMMON PITFALLS/ERRORS

  Narrative/No Evidence Incomplete Responses (Failure to make a case)  Policy Expectations – Verification – See

Resource Manual

14

FR 4.5 Student Complaints

 Provide a copy of student complaint policies  Provide real examples (student names and ID removed) that document and illustrate how complaints are resolved  Provide a record of Student complaints (a complaint log) [Addressed as part of CS 3.13]  Address how complaints are handled from students enrolled at off-campus sites and via distance education 15

CS 3.3.1.1 Institutional Effectiveness: Educational Programs

 Common Issues: – Lack of defined student learning outcomes and/or methods for assessing the outcomes – Limited/Immature data – Not documenting use of data to make improvements – Not addressing distance education and off-campus site programs.

16

CS 3.3.1.1 Cycle

Expected Outcomes Assessment: Results & Evaluation Use of Results For Improvement 17

Area to Drill and Understand Discuss with SACSCOC Staff

       Reporting Substantive change Importance of QEP Abstract Reporting Adequacy of Full-Time Faculty Illustrating Policy Compliance [2 meanings] Defining Credit Hour for your institution Reporting Distance Education Addressing Institutional Effectiveness 18

12 - Month System Check-Up

 Determine adherence to planned schedule  Compile, edit, and track incoming drafts (attention to updates)  Revisit standards with multiple and special policy components  Determine need for Staff Advisory visit and agenda items 19

Pre-Submission Drill Maintain Focus and Watch the Clock  Provide clear narrative that demonstrates compliance, along with supporting evidence  Check computer links  Include prep time for unanticipated details  Seek external review and validation of reference documents 20

Questions and Observations

21