presented by: rudolph s. jackson, uncf lead consultant for fastap

1

Steps in the Accreditation CycleA Collaboration Effort:

The United Negro College Fundand

The Commission on Colleges

Presented by:

Rudolph S. Jackson, UNCF LeadConsultant for FASTAP

February 14, 2014

2

Objectives for today’s Session

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

Participants will:

3

Peer Review Capacity Building

SACSCOC UNCF

Strategic FocusStudentLearning

4

Resources Procedures and Activities

An Emphasis on Compliance(Accreditation Reviews)

Traditional Emphasis on Compliance and unit-level

effectiveness

-Institutional Mission-Financial support-Expertise and technical know-how-Personnel and student services-Governance

-Operating and policy procedures-Organization and reportingstructures

5

ResourcesProcedures and Activities Outcomes

Tracing a Shift to Outcomes Review

Traditional Emphasis on Compliance and unit-level

effectiveness

Emerging Refinements in Regional Accreditation

-Institutional Mission-Financial support-Expertise technical know-how-Personnel and student services-Governance

-Operating/policy procedures-Organization and reportingstructures

Student Learning

-Knowledge-Skills-Behavioral Patterns

6

FASTAPInitiative

(Financial and Strategic Technical Assistance Program)

Addressing Accreditation Issues Establishing Institutional Priorities Developing Workable Strategies for

improvements

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 StartedCont’d

Attend planned COC Sessions (e.g. annual meeting/orientation)

Review and discuss peer institutional experiences

Explore observer opportunities on visiting committees

8

UnderstandingThe Reaffirmation ProcessOrientation (>2 yrs before reaffirmation)

Advisory visit (optional)Compliance Certification (Off-site Review)

Focused ReportReaffirmation Committee (On-site Review)

Response Report (for COC Review)Fifth-Year/Interim Report

9

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

Fielding The Right Team

10

-ISSUE AREAS-• Faculty

• Curriculum• Administration and

Governance• Technical/Presentation

• Finance• Other

Compliance Coordinator with

direct access to CEO

Leadership Team

Institutional Resources and Information

11

12

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.

13

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%

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

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.

CS 3.3.1.1 Institutional Effectiveness: Educational Programs

16

17

CS 3.3.1.1 Cycle

ExpectedOutcomes

Assessment:Results &Evaluation

Use of ResultsFor

Improvement

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

Area to Drill and Understand- Discuss with SACSCOC Staff

18

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

12 - Month System Check-Up

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 documents20

Questions and Observations

21