report of a comprehensive evaluation...

REPORT OF A COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION VISIT

TO

DOÑA ANA COMMUNITY COLLEGE Las Cruces, New Mexico

April 28-30, 2014

FOR

The Higher Learning Commission A Commission of the North Central Association

EVALUATION TEAM Dr. Marian Gibney, Department Chair/Behavioral Sciences, Phoenix College, Maricopa Community Colleges, Phoenix, AZ, 85013 Dr. Deborah Jackman, Professor and Chair, Civil & Architectural Engineering & Construction Management, Milwaukee School of Engineering, Milwaukee, WI 53202 Dr. Bill Lamb, Vice President/Instruction, Kirkwood Community College, Cedar Rapids, IA 52406 Dr. Rebecca Nickoli, Team Chair, Vice President/Corporate College (Retired), Ivy Tech Community College, Indianapolis, IN 46208 Dr. Daniel Phelan, President, Jackson College, Jackson, MI 49201

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 2 5/30/14

Contents

I. Context and Nature of Visit ......................................................................................... 3 II. Commitment to Peer Review ...................................................................................... 5 III. Compliance with Federal Requirements ..................................................................... 7 IV. Fulfillment of the Criteria for Accreditation ...................................................................

a. Criterion One ................................................................................................... 7 b. Criterion Two………………………………………………………………………..11 c. Criterion Three………………………………………………………………………14 d. Criterion Four………………………………………………………………………..22 e. Criterion Five………………………………………………………………………..28

V. Team Recommendation…………………………………………………………………...32 VI. Embedded Changes in Affiliation Status………………………………………………...34 VII. Additional Comments and Explanations…………………………………………………34 Attachments

a. Interactions with Constituencies…………………………………………………..35 b. Documents Reviewed………………………………………………………………37 c. Federal Compliance Worksheet…………………………………………………..40 d. Worksheet on an Institution’s Program Length………………………………….51 e. Multi-Campus Report(s) (if applicable)…………………………………………..N/A

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 3 5/30/14

I. CONTEXT AND NATURE OF VISIT

A. Purpose of Visit This was a visit with three primary purposes: 1. Conduct a comprehensive visit of Doña Ana Community College (DACC) including

assurance that any previous concerns from the 2008 comprehensive visit have been appropriately addressed.

2. Conduct an embedded change visit in regard to a request for approval for a proposed A.S. degree in General Engineering.

3. Follow-up a May 2013 special HLC Advisory Visit in regard to the loss of nursing accreditation from the Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing (ACEN) and its ongoing impact on the institution.

During the May 2013 visit, the advisory team found that DACC did not meet Core Components 3c and 5b of the Criteria for Accreditation. The comprehensive visit team engaged in special follow-up to those two core components to ensure that they are now met. The Core Components in question are:

• Core Component 3c: The institution has the faculty and staff needed for effective, high quality programs and student services.

• Core Component 5b: The institution’s governance and administrative structures promote effective leadership and support collaboration processes that enable the institution to fulfill its mission.

B. Institutional Context

Doña Ana Community College is located in Las Cruces, New Mexico, and experienced its last comprehensive visit in 2008. Prior to that, it was considered a branch campus of New Mexico State University (NMSU), functioning within the NMSU College of Continuing Education. NMSU’s main campus is also in Las Cruces, New Mexico. DACC is one of four community colleges that are administratively connected to NMSU; the others are Alamogordo, Carlsbad and Grants. These three community colleges are more distant from Las Cruces, ranging in proximity from 67 miles to 278 miles away from the NMSU main campus. Doña Ana is a relatively young institution, offering its first courses in 1973, then serving a dual purpose as both branch campus of NMSU and an area vocational school; in its beginning years, it was housed in facilities owned by the University. Over the first few years of its existence, Dona Ana’s enrollment grew at a rapid pace and it soon needed its own facilities. According to DACC’s self-study (page 8), NMSU moved from an open enrollment institution to a more stringent set of admissions requirements in the late 1980’s. DACC began offering developmental education to accommodate students who were not ready to be admitted to the university, thus opening the way for a change in its own mission, adding transfer to its vocational mission. DACC’s organization structure includes a reporting relationship of its president to the executive vice-president/provost at NMSU, to whom the other three community college presidents also report. The governing board for DACC is the NMSU Board of Regents. There is an Advisory Board comprised of six members, two each from the three local school districts served by DACC.

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 4 5/30/14

There have been recent and significant changes in leadership at both the University and DACC. NMSU has a new President and Executive Vice-President/Provost and DACC has a new, incoming President scheduled to take on her new responsibilities within a few weeks of the visit. An interim Vice President for Academic Affairs (VPAA) at DACC remains in place. Throughout the team’s visit, there was general endorsement and support for the more transparent and collaborative environment enabled by the interim president and the interim VPAA.

C. Unique Aspects or Additions to the Visit The primary element of this visit that made it unique was the loss of the Nursing program’s specialized accreditation with ACEN (formerly NLNAC) in 2012. There followed an HLC Advisory Visit by a team of three peer reviewers who made the determination that DACC did not meet two core components of the Criteria for Accreditation (3c and 5b) at that time. During the visit, the 2014 comprehensive team was intent on determining if those core components are met at the present time. Team members read the self-study and other materials ahead of the visit, interviewed multiple stakeholders during the visit, and received new, relevant materials during the visit related to the institution’s response to regaining its lost Nursing accreditation.

D. Additional Locations or Branch Campuses Visited (if applicable) Team members visited the Gadsden Center, Workforce Center, Central Campus and East Mesa Campus. One team member assigned to examine DACC’s capacity to offer the new A.S. degree in General Engineering spent significant time at the Workforce Center where this program will be housed and also visited several labs at NMSU that are available for shared use.

E. Distance Delivery Reviewed Doña Ana is currently approved for distance education courses and programs as reflected in its current Status of Affiliation Status. Three members of the team were enrolled in several online courses as faculty in order to review courses. Courses reviewed are listed in Appendix B. One team member met with faculty who teach online courses. In addition, that team member met with several individuals involved in the “Quality Matters” (QM) initiative, a process aimed at embedding consistent quality indicators into online courses. As reported during the interview with online faculty, consistency is supported through a common curriculum, faculty who teach regularly online, and common assessments. The Business Technology faculty completed an online student survey to compare responses to face-to-face students, and they found the student perceptions to be the same. The faculty also reported that technical support is consistent for both faculty and students, and that professional development opportunities range from collegial sharing to participation in the NMSU Teaching Academy. Canvas, the learning management platform, is supported through the NMSU Academic Technology department and, although the faculty felt that the College should require students to participate in some Canvas training, the software is intuitive and students seem to have little problem learning how to access course materials. The faculty also believed that success in online courses could be improved with the availability of online tutoring as the service is limited at this time. Based on data showing that success in online courses was 8% lower than face-to-face sections, the faculty and administration made a commitment to utilize the Quality Matters

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 5 5/30/14

program and rubric to assess and enhance online course quality. With some external funding and the support of administration, 43% of the faculty has completed some level of QM training. The Faculty Council has helped to develop the QM philosophy as part of the College culture and elements of it have helped to improve classroom teaching as well. Adjunct faculty are given a certificate once they have completed training, and the certificate is recognized system-wide. Through this initiative that began seven years ago, peer support and encouragement has focused on what faculty value most – quality student learning.

II. COMMITMENT TO PEER REVIEW

A. Comprehensiveness of the Self-Study Process The self-study process was appropriately participative, including faculty and staff representing numerous functional departments and levels in the organization. There were two student members on the Accreditation Committee and one adjunct faculty member. The team believed the self-study document was somewhat superficial in terms of its lack of focus on analytic narrative and even lacking in content about some issues important to the team’s understanding of the College. Most particularly, the administration and Accreditation Committee did not choose to document the many initiatives that have been developed to address the issue of the loss of nursing accreditation and what the College is doing to restore that re-accreditation as noted more fully below. There also appeared to be some errors in the self-study, perhaps due to inconsistent editing. For example, the compiled results of a Customer Satisfaction Survey distributed by the Business Office contained what appeared to be mathematical errors and other qualitative inconsistencies, calling the validity of some conclusions drawn from this data into question.

B. Integrity of the Self-Study Report Further explanatory narrative in the Self-Study regarding the loss of Nursing Accreditation would have better supported the team’s work. There was a significant element that was, for the most part, missing from the Self-Study that the team believes should have been addressed more directly. Specifically, the team was surprised to learn that there were several efforts aimed at addressing the loss of nursing accreditation that were not identified or described in the Self-Study. Among the dozens of documents in the electronic resource room, there was one memo that briefly mentioned the Strike Force and the Commission on Nursing Accreditation Oversight, two of several important initiatives launched at the College to immediately begin addressing the loss of nursing accreditation. Two members of the team learned about these several initiatives after speaking with the Board of Regents and in a second meeting with the NMSU Executive Vice-President/Provost and the Associate Provost/Accreditation Liaison Officer. Further, due to the absence of mention of the initiatives in question in the 2013 Advisory Report, it appears possible that the 2013 HLC Advisory Team was also not aware of the existence of the Strike Force, the newly-formed Nursing Commission, and an investigation launched by the Board of Regents. Because the comprehensive visit is meant to look back at the last ten years at the institution and not only the time since the Advisory Visit, it is difficult to understand why the institution did not explain these efforts “up front” as they would have significantly

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 6 5/30/14

added to the team’s confidence that these serious issues were, in fact, being addressed as fully as possible.

C. Adequacy of Progress in Addressing Previously Identified Challenges As a result of the recommendations of the 2008 Comprehensive Visit Team, DACC submitted a Monitoring Report and a Progress Report, both in June 2010. The Monitoring Report was related to improving communications and relationships between the NMSU Board of Regents, the DACC Advisory Board, and the College administration. Part of the remedy for these concerns was an updated Operating Agreement between the institutions, adding more agenda items to the Regents meetings about the community college and essentially providing more opportunities for ongoing communications. Communication remains an issue to some extent as the team was told that the DACC Advisory Board learned about the loss of Nursing Accreditation by reading about it in the press rather than being told directly. The team will address the need to improve communications more extensively later in this report. The Progress Report was submitted in regard to concerns about student support services. The ways in which DACC has improved support services to its students are many and significant. The following are but a few of the ways that DACC has improved its student support services and, as a result, its completion rates: accelerated developmental education, learning communities, enhanced tutoring services, improved Library Services, a Student Success Center at the East Mesa Campus, and more. Achieving the Dream’s recognition of DACC as a “Leader College” on two separate occasions is a wonderful accomplishment for the College and well-deserved in terms of its commitment to student success. DACC underwent a visit in February, 2011, to assess compliance with Title IV financial aid at the Gadsden Center and the Workforce Center. In addition, HLC sent a team in September of 2011 to review the proposed Aerospace Program. That visit resulted in approval for the program. The most complex visit was the May 2013 Advisory visit by an HLC Team to review the situation in regard to loss of the nursing accreditation by ACEN, the specialized accreditor. Three team members visited to provide “Special Monitoring” per HLC Policy 9.1, Professional or Specialized Accreditation. The College was also required to submit a written response to the concerns about the loss of the nursing accreditation. The Advisory Team found that DACC did not meet two of the Core Components for Accreditation at that time, as referenced in Section I.A, Purpose of the Visit, in this report. The Commission deferred action about the Core Components to the 2014 Comprehensive Visit Team and their attention was addressed to that as part of this visit.

D. Notification of Evaluation Visit and Solicitation of Third-Party Comment The College used a variety of media to communicate with its stakeholders to solicit Third Party Comments. There was a solicitation of Third Party Comments on the College Website, in three local newspapers, and in repeated public service announcements on the radio. The College also posted the solicitation in the DACC Report to the Community which is direct mailed and is also used as a supplement in the local newspaper. The team received a small number of comments immediately before the visit

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 7 5/30/14

and made sure to address any concerns as part of its discovery process.

III. COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS

See Appendix C (page 40) for the Federal Compliance Report. IV. FULFILLMENT OF THE CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITATION

CRITERION ONE: MISSION. The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the institution’s operations. Core Component 1A: The institution’s mission is broadly understood within the institution and guides its operations.

Subcomponent 1. The mission statement is developed through a process suited to the nature and culture of the institution and is adopted by the governing board.

Subcomponent 2. The institution’s academic programs, student support services, and enrollment profile are consistent with its stated mission.

Subcomponent 3. The institution’s planning and budgeting priorities align with and support the mission.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

__ Core Component is met with concerns __ Core Component is not met

Evidence: The mission is developed through a collaborative process and is regularly reviewed and updated. Words in the mission such as “diverse,” “responsive,” “accessible,” and “workforce and economic development” are reflected by the range of academic programs, customized training for business and industry, and the on-campus diversity of students and employees that reflects the local population. DACC also embraces Values statements and, as a part of the self-study process, revised and updated them. Identification of new programs for DACC is tied to the mission statement, particularly to the element of how they choose new programs that enhance the preparation of students for the local economy. Recent examples include the General Engineering (reviewed as part of an Embedded Change request during this visit), Culinary Arts, and Aerospace Technology. Each has a direct link to job opportunities in the local environment. Each program decision was also supported by the advice and expertise of local stakeholders, e.g., those who serve on program advisory committees, who help the College craft the program curriculums and identify equipment and other program needs. DACC serves a very large geographic area and planning for where and when to locate new educational and outreach centers is driven by the strategic planning process as informed by the mission. The College has recently added new instructional centers in Hatch and Chaparral and continues to grow enrollments at the Gadsden Center. DACC, though in the midst of transition in its senior administration, has advanced its

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 8 5/30/14

planning efforts which are aligned with state budget priorities. The College’s Strategic Plan, “Shaping Doña Ana Community College’s Future: A Best Practice Approach to Student Success 2012-2018,” demonstrates this alignment, particularly when compared alongside the organizational budget. For example, the strategic plan identifies a planned goal of 16% for the College’s three-year default rate. Similarly, the budget documents reveal the budget allocation for the Inceptia organization in concert with NMSU. A strong correlation between budget and strategic plan provides a clear message to employees and the public regarding the College’s intention in the achievement of its mission.

Core Component 1B: The mission is articulated publicly.

Subcomponent 1. The institution clearly articulates its mission through one or more public documents, such as statements of purpose, vision, values, goals, plans, or institutional priorities.

Subcomponent 2. The mission document or documents are current and explain the extent of the institution’s emphasis on the various aspects of its mission, such as instruction, scholarship, research, application of research, creative works, clinical service, public service, economic development, and religious or cultural purpose.

Subcomponent 3. The mission document or documents identify the nature, scope, and intended constituents of the higher education programs and services the institution provides.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met __ Core Component is met with concerns __ Core Component is not met

Evidence: The mission appears in numerous places where students, potential students, and other stakeholders can see it. Some of those places include: the College website, the student handbook/catalog, posters around the campus, the DACC Quick Facts flyer, and in various internal documents related to planning and assessment. The Faculty Council refers to the mission in its statement of commitment to the institution and the commitment they have to providing teaching, advising, and other services in support of the students.

Core Component 1C: The institution understands the relationship between its mission and the diversity of society.

Subcomponent 1. The institution addresses its role in a multicultural society.

Subcomponent 2. The institution’s processes and activities reflect attention to human diversity as appropriate within its mission and for the constituencies it serves.


Evidence: The composition of the faculty, staff, and students at the College reflects the population of Doña Ana County and the adjoining area. The majority of the local population is white and Hispanic and there are few African Americans, Asians, or American Indians locally. As an

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 9 5/30/14

example, 30% of the full-time faculty is of Hispanic origin with approximately the same percentage among the part-time faculty. The College offers programs across five divisions with a wide range of disciplines represented. They offer a mix of career programs and transfer programs; Adult Basic Education (ABE) and English as a Second or Other Language; Community Education, including offerings for children and older adults; and offerings to the Business and Industry community, both customized training and “off-the-shelf” courses. There are many student organizations at DACC, some tied to discipline areas, national honorary organizations, service learning, and some related to student ethnicity or gender. Students spoke to the team about their pride in “their” college and the importance they place on being engaged in activities there. The College is accessible across its broad geographic area with numerous learning and outreach centers, some of which are small campuses with student services and some of which are small learning centers, early college high schools and other high schools where dual credit and ABE is offered. DACC serves the local military community at White Sands Missile Range through online courses. The College offers a variety of means to access its classes. There are both face-to-face and online learning opportunities, and dual credit options for students at several local high schools. On campus, students can choose accelerated courses and courses offered in learning communities (that is, courses that are paired for maximum student success in both).

Core Component 1D: The institution’s mission demonstrates commitment to the public good.

Subcomponent 1. Actions and decisions reflect an understanding that in its educational role the institution serves the public, not solely the institution, and thus entails a public obligation.

Subcomponent 2. The institution’s educational responsibilities take primacy over other purposes, such as generating financial returns for investors, contributing to a related or parent organization, or supporting external interests.

Subcomponent 3. The institution engages with its identified external constituencies and communities of interest and responds to their needs as its mission and capacity allow.



Evidence: The Career and Technical programs at DACC each have an advisory council that meets twice a year. Some members of these advisory councils attended public forums during the HLC visit and attested to their interest and involvement with the College and its programs. Similarly, local businesses provide many internship and co-op education opportunities for DACC students. Students in health programs also participate in clinical site experiences typically associated with such programs. In the self-study, there is an extensive list of clinical and internship sites that give evidence to the range or opportunities for students at

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 10 5/30/14

the College. The College is engaged with a variety of community service entities to extend its reach into neighborhoods, local public schools, and apartment complexes. Students may take ESOL and ABE courses on-site as a result of several of these community partnerships. Students from low-income neighborhoods taking such classes may then go on to DACC for credit programs, having been introduced to DACC staff and services in their own “back yard.” Another element of outreach is the Academy for Learning in Retirement, a function of the Community Education program. Short programs are offered several times a year to seniors on topics of interest to them. Over 300 seniors attended this program during the 2012-2013 academic year. Some partnerships are aimed at local economic development; for example, the Small Business Development Center (SBDC) is housed at the DACC Workforce Center. SBDC offers workshops and one-on-one advising for current or potential small business owners to help them grow their businesses. The Workforce Center staff work closely with local business and industry to identify training needs and provide solutions. One team member met with representatives from several local businesses at the Workforce Center and also at the Gadsden Campus and heard firsthand how important and valuable the services provided by this department of the College are. This department also works closely with the public workforce development system to provide training for unemployed individuals. There are five College centers where students may take ABE and ESOL courses. Students who take these courses may be preparing for the General Equivalency Diploma (GED) exam, learning new or better English skills, preparing for citizenship, or being introduced to soft skills and computer skills. Over 3,000 students were served in such programs in the 2012-2013 academic year, confirming that Doña Ana Community College is validating this element of its mission. Team Determination on Criterion One:

_X_ Criterion is met __ Criterion is met with concerns

__ Criterion is not met

Summary Statement on Criterion: Doña Ana Community College develops and routinely updates its mission with the appropriate participation of its stakeholders. The mission is published in numerous College publications and on its website. Faculty, staff, and other invested parties are aware of and understand their roles in implementing the mission. One of the findings of the team was that the College has developed and delivered outstanding student support services. Many of the support services have been developed relatively recently as the College was required to submit a Progress Report on this topic in June 2010. As a result of a negative finding about student support services, the College made student support services a priority and that was evident in terms of the many new and enhanced support services that the students now enjoy.

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 11 5/30/14

CRITERION TWO: Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct. The institution acts with integrity; its conduct is ethical and responsible.

Core Component 2A: The institution operates with integrity in its financial, academic, personnel, and auxiliary functions; it establishes and follows fair and ethical policies and processes for its governing board, administration, faculty, and staff.

Team Determination: __ Core Component is met

_X_ Core Component is met with concerns __ Core Component is not met

Evidence: As part of the New Mexico State University System, Doña Ana Community College has a complex and somewhat confusing governance system which lacks clarity regarding the extent of roles and responsibilities of each body, as well as their respective obligations to each other. The College’s Advisory Board, comprised solely of representatives of the three area school districts, sets local millage rates and recommends an annual operating budget. The NMSU Board of Regents approves the budget, sets tuition rates, and establishes policy for the College. However, evidence has revealed that this governance system, as currently deployed, has not provided essential communication to and appropriate involvement with the Advisory Board. The team heard that DACC Advisory Board members were not informed in a timely way of significant nursing accreditation actions involving the College. One Advisory Board member described the relationship with the University as ‘superficial.’ Such omissions not only foster miscommunication and mistrust, but also create operational challenges for the College’s administration in its work. There appears to be optimism that a recently revised operational agreement between the two institutions will address these concerns.

The current membership structure of the Advisory Board for Doña Ana Community College limits broader community involvement and has the potential for conflict of interest regarding the establishing of millage rates. The Advisory Board is comprised of two members from each of the three Boards of Education from Gadsden, Hatch, and Las Cruces School Districts in Doña Ana County. This body is legally charged with setting the College’s millage rate. Conversations with Board members revealed that, as a practical matter, the determination of rates, and the timing of millage increases is based upon the plans for millage rates and construction projects of the local schools. While members stated that they work this out through their long-standing relationships with each other, this structure has the potential of putting the needs of school districts ahead of the needs of the College. Furthermore, the absence of other voices on the Advisory Board further limits inclusion of the broader constituency of the College’s service area in the direction-setting of the College. Doña Ana Community College has sound policies and practices in place with regard to its financial operations. A review of audited financial documents, as well as discussions with key College leadership and staff demonstrated not only the absence of material audit findings, but also an organization that is financially sound. The Vice-President for Business and Finance, who was the Interim President at the time of the visit, noted the College’s intention to modify its millage allocation, such that more funding was available for College

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 12 5/30/14

operations versus additional construction, Such planning represents a forward-thinking plan and confirmed a mindfulness toward operational and sustainability in keeping with the vagaries of enrollment levels and infrastructure needs. While the work of the Doña Ana Community College’s financial aid office follows generally acceptable practice, decisions in that office have been occasionally overturned by the Senior Vice President for Student Services. A review of financial aid files, and discussion with financial aid staff, revealed the existence of students who were retroactively withdrawn from a single course, multiple courses, a semester, or even a year’s study. This action resulted in a reduced or completely waived financial liability for students, and has the potential to keep the student in good academic standing (i.e., according to accepted Standards of Academic Progress) when that outcome is not warranted. Furthermore, the course history of the students has been altered to accomplish this end, e.g., the outcome could result in the student appearing not to have enrolled at all for the time period in question. The matter had been brought to the attention of senior administration by financial aid staff and the team learned after the visit that there has been a recent change in process. The Vice-President for Academic Affairs will now review requests from students who petition to withdraw after the published withdrawal period and determine if there is sufficient reason for granting the exception. The team believes there has been poor practice in this area and the College should ensure that the procedures for the appeals and exceptions are written, broadly published so that students are clear about what is possible, and that appropriate documentation must underpin decisions that are exceptions to the normally acceptable withdrawal practice.

Core Component 2B: The institution presents itself clearly and completely to its students and to the public with regard to its programs, requirements, faculty and staff, costs to students, control, and accreditation relationships.


_X_ Core Component is met with concerns ___ Core Component is not met

Evidence: Doña Ana Community College has not fully articulated its accreditation status with the Commission clearly to the public. Printed and distributed institutional documents, such as numerous credit course schedules, the 2012-2016 Strategic Plan, and its 2012-2013 Report to the Community included no indication of its relationship to the Commission, nor its status. Additionally, though the College does include the Commission’s Mark of Affiliation on one of its web pages, the text associated with the Mark states: “As part of New Mexico State University, Doña Ana Community College is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools” potentially leading the reader to conclude that the College is not independently accredited. In contrast, the DACC 2013-2014 Catalog does include the correct statement. The team referred the Marketing Director to the HLC website for guidance on College compliance regarding the use of the Mark of Affiliation and the communication of the College’s relationship with HLC. If not attended to, omitting the description of the relationship to the Commission, or incorrectly presenting the relationship, does not satisfy the Commission’s Obligations of Affiliation.

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 13 5/30/14

Student Right to Know data, regarding crime statistics and campus security, is currently consolidated with that of New Mexico State University. Discussions with College security supervisors, as well as institutional documents (including the DACC 2013 Annual Security Report), noted that part of the rationale for this approach is due to DACC’s Central Campus proximity to NMSU. Staff indicated that the shared parking lot between the intuitions makes it difficult to determine which organization is responsible for reporting the occurrences there. College officials did note that they have, in the past, attempted to provide data separate from NMSU and found it difficult to do so. The College has been told that it is acceptable for the institutions’ data to be added together to create a single rate for reporting purposes. The College might wish to consider whether its status as a separately accredited institution creates a situation that would make individual reporting more appropriate.

Doña Ana Community College publicly reports its financial aid default rate as 18.5% (2013). Again, DACC’s individual rate is masked because its default data is consolidated with that of New Mexico State University data. Again, as a separately accredited institution, DACC may want to consider whether the interests of the students might be better served if the College could publish the separate default rate information.

Core Component 2C: The governing board of the institution is sufficiently autonomous to make decisions in the best interest of the institution and to assure its integrity.

Subcomponent 1. The governing board’s deliberations reflect priorities to preserve and enhance the institution.

Subcomponent 2. The governing board reviews and considers the reasonable and relevant interests of the institution’s internal and external constituencies during its decision-making deliberations.

Subcomponent 3. The governing board preserves its independence from undue influence on the part of donors, elected officials, ownership interests, or other external parties when such influence would not be in the best interest of the institution.

Subcomponent 4. The governing board delegates day-to-day management of the institution to the administration and expects the faculty to oversee academic matters.



Evidence: The Board of Regents of New Mexico State University also serves as the governing board for Doña Ana Community College and conducts itself in a manner appropriate to a governing body. Institutional documents, board minutes, and discussions with Regents confirm that it has historically operated in a manner appropriate for a governing body.

Matters surrounding the loss of the DACC nursing program’s specialized accreditation from NLNAC/ACEN demonstrated a change in that practice and resulted in the direct involvement of Regents in operational matters. Meetings with the Regents, as well as institutional documents reveal that Regents, without the participation of the DACC president, met with area hospital CEOs in an attempt to make assurances and restore confidence about the situation regarding nursing. Additionally, the NMSU President created a Strike Force to

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 14 5/30/14

address the status of students in the Nursing program and how to ensure they were not negatively impacted by the loss of accreditation to the extent possible. While the loss of program accreditation is indeed of concern to the College and the NMSU Regents, exceeding the scope of governance responsibilities further adds to the confusion of the issue and disrupts the College administration’s authority and responsibility to address the problem.

In the recent past, the New Mexico State University and Doña Ana Community College both experienced significant institutional leadership changes at the president and executive vice-president/provost levels. The Board of Regents are now in the process of restoring optimal practices with regard to governance. Discussions with Regents indicated their renewed understanding of the importance of more frequent and meaningful dialogue with the DACC Advisory Board, of accountability regarding accreditation, improved communications across various groups, and their responsibilities as Regents. Continued attention by the Board of Regents on the aforementioned items will accord the College administration the ability to do its work, as well as provide for a better functioning for all parties involved.

Core Component 2D: The institution is committed to freedom of expression and the pursuit of truth in teaching and learning.


Evidence: Academic freedom for faculty is defined in the NMSU Board of Regents Operating Principles Article IV.E, and the NMSU Policy Manual Chapter 5. Each document affords students and faculty freedom of expression and the interchange of academic discourse.

Faculty members are hired with appropriate credentials and are responsible for the development of course content which is then approved by the college committees. Full-time instructors are free to select textbooks which support course learning objectives. Instructors may also provide input to the textbook committee, the chairperson, or coordinator regarding the selection of texts. Adjunct instructors are invited to provide input to the departmental textbook selection committees.

Promotion and tenure guidelines require that faculty continue learning, service within the College, and leadership. (As noted in the Self-Study document, page 44.

The Student Handbook contains the Freedom of Expression policy which provides guidelines to students reflecting academic freedom.

DACC is in the process of updating the current policy related to intellectual property rights for faculty and staff. The policy will define college support and ownership in instances where faculty intellectual work is supported by college or university resources.

Core Component 2E: The institution ensures that faculty, students, and staff acquire, discover, and apply knowledge responsibly.

Subcomponent 1. The institution provides effective oversight and support services to ensure the

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 15 5/30/14

integrity of research and scholarly practice conducted by its faculty, staff, and students.

Subcomponent 2. Students are offered guidance in the ethical use of information resources.

Subcomponent 3. The institution has and enforces policies on academic honesty and integrity. Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met


Evidence: DACC allocates budget resources each year to support faculty professional development. This allocation is in addition to the professional development opportunities provided throughout the year at the college as described on page 46 of the Self-Study. Faculty and staff reported during the site visit that funding was available to support professional growth and necessary training. Faculty job descriptions include expectations for continued learning, service to the college, and leadership. The faculty has access to the NMSU Teaching Academy which presents information and successful practices on a number of topics. The College reports that it “follows the NMSU Policy Manual for sabbaticals and encourages tenured faculty members to use the process;” however, no sabbatical awards have been given in the last several years. During the site visit, faculty and administration shared that there is a perception that faculty should not apply as they will not be granted. Current administration hopes to rectify this perception. The library provides support for student and faculty research and scholarly practice. (Self-Study page 49) The relationship with the NMSU library, as reported by faculty, is an asset to research and student/faculty support as the College has extensive resources and collaborative relationships with a variety of external libraries and resources. The College provides tutoring services to students in a number of areas. The library also provides handouts and tutorials related to the appropriate use of information and plagiarism. In addition, the College policy defines the ethical use of technology for students and faculty. Team Determination on Criterion Two:

__ Criterion is met _X_ Criterion is met with concerns


Summary Statement on Criterion: With respect to the ethical and responsible conduct of DACC, a number of concerns were raised for the HLC visiting team. While the institution is operating well, serving students and working in support of its mission, there have been a number of changes in leadership. Matters involving the loss of specialized accreditation, communication challenges, data reporting, and practices involving “retro-withdrawals” of financial aid are in need of immediate attention by the College. Taken together, these aforementioned items suggest

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 16 5/30/14

the need for follow-up to ensure that the College continues to meet this Criterion.

Academic policies at DACC are often a part of the NMSU system, and the College is required to work within those policies and procedures, as they are a part of the system. The Academic Freedom policy is a good example of how DACC is governed by the larger university system. However, the College faculty and staff ensure that the policy is reflected in the work and practice of the faculty and students. This is true with the pursuit of knowledge and learning for students, which is a natural part of the faculty commitment to community college education.

CRITERION THREE: Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources, and Support. The institution provides high quality education, wherever and however its offerings are delivered.

Core Component 3A: The institution’s degree programs are appropriate to higher education.

Subcomponent 1. Courses and programs are current and require levels of performance by students appropriate to the degree or certificate awarded.

Subcomponent 2. The institution articulates and differentiates learning goals for its undergraduate, graduate, post-baccalaureate, post-graduate, and certificate programs.

Subcomponent 3. The institution’s program quality and learning goals are consistent across all modes of delivery and all locations (on the main campus, at additional locations, by distance delivery, as dual credit, through contractual or consortial arrangements, or any other modality).


Evidence: Course materials, including online courses, were reviewed and found to have appropriate levels of rigor and performance as related to student learning and development.

DACC is committed to the education of its students and provides the ability for them to succeed. The College presents itself fairly to all concerning academic issues, and the institution also insures that all instruction is grounded in academic honesty and integrity. The faculty and staff are truly involved and committed to the student learning experience.

Degree programs are consistent with higher education standards for both career-technical and transfer. The unique relationship with NMSU allows for students to have one single transcript and promotes both articulation and course consistency. Due to the close relationship with NSMU, DACC faculty and administration relied on NMSU expertise with programs like nursing and criminal justice. The delineation between NMSU and DACC is difficult to discern in many instances related to degree programs and services, and the separation or autonomy of DACC is not well defined by policies or procedures. As reviewed by team members, the master course syllabi contain learning goals consistent with both academic transfer and technical skill development. Courses are connected by the master course syllabus which helps to guide course consistency across locations and

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 17 5/30/14

instructional modalities. Distance learning faculty have a commitment to the Quality Matters assessment and course development process, and the college has funded a number of faculty to seek training as a reviewer and process trainer. Because many courses in a variety of venues are taught by the same faculty, there is an inherent level of consistency in both curriculum and instruction.

Core Component 3B: The institution demonstrates that the exercise of intellectual inquiry and the acquisition, application, and integration of broad learning and skills are integral to its educational programs.

Subcomponent 1. The general education program is appropriate to the mission, educational offerings, and degree levels of the institution. Subcomponent 2. The institution articulates the purposes, content, and intended learning outcomes of its undergraduate general education requirements. The program of general education is grounded in a philosophy or framework developed by the institution or adopted from an established framework. It imparts broad knowledge and intellectual concepts to students and develops skills and attitudes that the institution believes every college-educated person should possess.

Subcomponent 3. Every degree program offered by the institution engages students in collecting, analyzing, and communicating information; in mastering modes of inquiry or creative work; and in developing skills adaptable to changing environments.

Subcomponent 4. The education offered by the institution recognizes the human and cultural diversity of the world in which students live and work.

Subcomponent 5. The faculty and students contribute to scholarship, creative work, and the discovery of knowledge to the extent appropriate to their programs and the institution’s mission.



Evidence: The General Education program is defined clearly on page 49 of the Self-Study. The five stated components to the DACC philosophy of general education are appropriate and consistent with other institutions of higher learning. The College has course descriptions and learning expectations/goals published in the college catalog as well as on the college website. This information is easily available to students and advisors. The DACC faculty use a common master course syllabus that defines clearly course learning outcomes for students and reflects the high standards for course success.

DACC faculty are committed to general education and career skill attainment, and faculty collaborate across disciplines to ensure the intended learning outcomes reflect general education requirements.

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 18 5/30/14

The College faculty and administration have made a commitment to the assessment of critical thinking as a focus for the college assessment and continuous improvement process. As reported by faculty during the site visit, DACC does not have the curriculum authority to establish course prerequisites that are not approved by NMSU. This restriction can be problematic when serving students with a focus on student success. Faculty and staff are committed to recognizing diversity and include elements of cultural diversity across the curriculum. The College program review process is new and will be key to future course level improvements. The department chairs reported during the site visit that they have communicated to faculty how individual and department goals are reflected in the college strategic plan.

Core Component 3C: The institution has the faculty and staff needed for effective, high-quality programs and student services.

Subcomponent 1. The institution has sufficient numbers and continuity of faculty members to carry out both the classroom and the non-classroom roles of faculty, including oversight of the curriculum and expectations for student performance; establishment of academic credentials for instructional staff; involvement in assessment of student learning.

Subcomponent 2. All instructors are appropriately credentialed, including those in dual credit, contractual, and consortial programs. Subcomponent 3. Instructors are evaluated regularly in accordance with established institutional policies and procedures.

Subcomponent 4. The institution has processes and resources for assuring that instructors are current in their disciplines and adept in their teaching roles; it supports their professional development. Subcomponent 5. Instructors are accessible for student inquiry.

Subcomponent 6. Staff members providing student support services, such as tutoring, financial aid advising, academic advising, and co-curricular activities, are appropriately qualified, trained, and supported in their professional development.


Evidence: Although DACC nursing program lost accreditation due in part to faculty qualifications, the College has hired additional, qualified nursing faculty at the time of the site visit, and plans are in place to regain accreditation. At the time of the site visit, the College was in the process of hiring a seventh nursing faculty member which will bring the College credential standard to the required level. The table on page 43 in the Self-Study reflects the degrees and qualifications of faculty. As confirmed by the review team, the number of faculty is appropriate, although many faculty are engaged in a variety of teaching and learner support roles at the college. As observed

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 19 5/30/14

by the review team, the faculty are clearly dedicated to student success and access, and they are clearly willing to collaborate across disciplines to realize success. This was evident in both the discussions with faculty teaching in Learning Communities and faculty involved with online learning opportunities. Faculty credentials are evaluated as a part of the hiring process and evidence of faculty qualifications for any position is maintained through Human Resources. Each semester, faculty receive feedback from students via the “Student Survey of Instruction.” Additionally, faculty receive formative feedback through classroom observations and, each year, full-time faculty submit a notebook with evidence of their work and reflections on that evidence. The NMSU Executive Vice-President/Provost participates in the review of faculty promotion and tenure portfolios. DACC encourages faculty to participate in discipline area conferences and provides support each year in the amount of $1,375 per faculty member. The Faculty Council also has additional funds that can be used for professional development. As reported by faculty during the site visit, professional development is encouraged and supported by the college administration. Faculty schedule office hours, some online or face-to-face, so that students have access to assistance and to ask questions. Many faculty volunteer to work in the learning centers, both in the Academic Readiness Center (ARC) initiative and the Student Success Center. Student support staff are well-qualified and well-trained. Counseling services staff members are licensed professionals and provide services to both students and families, as noted on page 69 of the Self-Study. As stated in the Self-Study, DACC provides services for students with disabilities. During the student forum, two students reported that services were sometimes delayed and not approved in a timely manner, especially with some individual programs and faculty members. From the site visit review, these examples appear to be isolated and not consistent with the overall quality of services provided the Students with Disabilities Office. DACC provides services to veterans through the Veterans Services Office. The staff work in partnership with the Veterans Administration to assist veterans and dependents to access programs for which they eligible. Student veterans reported that the service provided to them was of a high quality and they appreciated the office staff support.

Core Component 3D: The institution provides support for student learning and effective teaching.

Subcomponent 1. The institution provides student support services suited to the needs of its student populations.

Subcomponent 2. The institution provides for learning support and preparatory instruction to address the academic needs of its students. It has a process for directing entering students to courses and programs for which the students are adequately prepared.

Subcomponent 3. The institution provides academic advising suited to its programs and the needs of its students.

Subcomponent 4. The institution provides to students and instructors the infrastructure and

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 20 5/30/14

resources necessary to support effective teaching and learning (technological infrastructure, scientific laboratories, libraries, performance spaces, clinical practice sites, museum collections, as appropriate to the institution’s offerings). Subcomponent 5. The institution provides to students guidance in the effective use of research and information resources.


Evidence: The new ARC initiative addresses the support for students in developmental math and English. The three faculty who have offices in the ARC are clearly committed to its success. From interviews with faculty and staff, one significant difference when compared to the Student Success Center concept is the presentation of short workshops for students and faculty. The dedicated space and faculty commitment are paramount to the success of the ARC; however, volunteering time can be a challenge to sustain as the served population grows. Planning for the future of the ARC concept or the continuation of the Student Success Center concept may be an issue to address in the future as apparent from interviews during the site visit. DACC provides a variety of support services that include tutoring, success centers, library support, technology assistance, early warning processes, specialized laboratories, and student workshops. These support student learning and success and fit with the college Achieving the Dream (AtD) initiative. The College has supported Learning Communities since 2009, and many faculty and students participate in the linked course model. DACC has used the Learning Community model to help students accelerate through developmental coursework and also to help students placing into development courses to complete a companion college level course simultaneously. Because the course curriculum at DACC is aligned with NMSU, the DACC faculty do not have complete control over course content and development. This is especially true in that DACC faculty do not have the authority to identify prerequisite skills necessary for students to be successful, as reported by DACC faculty and confirmed by administration at DACC and NMSU. The lack of ability to set pre and co-requisites is significant when establishing student success pathways and the lack of local control with these decisions is a concern. Academic advisors are available on both campuses and work to assist incoming, current and outgoing students. The advisors utilize the college catalog, degree plans, and the STAR degree audit system in their support of student success. The College maintains an open door policy and encourages students of all backgrounds to attend classes and enhance their learning opportunities. In some courses, placement is determined by a test score, and the College offers a variety of developmental courses to help students reach College level expertise in core subject areas. The College’s infrastructure is well maintained and open to student use with no deferred

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 21 5/30/14

maintenance issues. Gathering spaces and study areas are available as well as computer labs and specialized support areas previously mentioned. As apparent through interviews during the team site visit, the College administration, faculty and staff are proud of the building spaces and services provided.

Core Component 3E: The institution fulfills the claims it makes for an enriched educational environment.

Subcomponent 1. Co-curricular programs are suited to the institution’s mission and contribute to the educational experience of its students. Subcomponent 2. The institution demonstrates any claims it makes about contributions to its students’ educational experience by virtue of aspects of its mission, such as research, community engagement, service learning, religious or spiritual purpose, and economic development.



Evidence: Many career and technical programs provide students with internships or experiential learning opportunities as a part of their programs of study. Faculty encourage student participation in community projects and service opportunities. Learning Communities, although small in number, are growing opportunities for students to learn in a common cohort environment. These linked courses help to engage students through shared and relevant assignments jointly developed by Learning Center faculty. The library and success centers are well equipped and staffed to serve student needs. The resources available include electronic databases, books, resource guides, technology, and so forth. Additionally, the staff is trained to engage students in a learning environment that supports the college mission. The faculty reported during the site interviews that the library resources are not only extensive but also supported by the relationship with the NMSU library and the state library association. Students and faculty can request resources through a documented process that can reach out to libraries throughout the state and deliver these requests in a timely manner.

Recognizing that many students have travel challenges with limited bus service to the main campuses, the College made a commitment to reach out to the smaller, disadvantaged areas to provide educational opportunities for those who live in the neighborhoods. The outreach centers bring a clear community to connection to the college and serve the needs of the lower income populations with travel challenges. These centers are extensions of DACC that are responding clearly to an important area need.

Team Determination on Criterion Three:

_X_ Criterion is met __ Criterion is met with concerns


NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 22 5/30/14

Summary Statement on Criterion: DACC has well defined programs of study and a variety of options for students including both career and transfer. The College has structured programs so that students can work to develop skill sets necessary to be successful, and then build on those skills to lead to a credential, moving from lower to higher credentials over time. Programs involve their advisory committees to ensure consistency with workplace needs, and articulation to NMSU is clearly defined as a part of the system agreement. Faculty are appropriately credentialed, and both full-time and adjunct faculty are expected to meet the same standards for course quality and consistency of instructional delivery. Faculty have some academic freedom in terms of goals and course delivery; however, each course has a master syllabus that defines educational goals and ensures that students are mastering the same competencies within courses and across disciplines. Activities related to the Achieving the Dream initiative include orientations and advising for students. Many support services are available to students and are well supported by faculty volunteers. DACC faculty does not have autonomy when it comes to the ownership of the curriculum and they must work closely with NMSU for new course development and curriculum approval. This limits the ability for faculty to address unique needs of the DACC student population, and the lack of ability to set prerequisites based on student need is a team concern. The College has worked to provide consistent instructional delivery and service to all campuses, although each has unique needs and not necessarily all programs are available at all campuses. The goal of the College is to be fiscally responsible while serving the needs of each community within its region.

CRITERION FOUR: Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement. The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments, and support services, and it evaluates their effectiveness for student learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement.

Core Component 4A: The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs.

Subcomponent 1. The institution maintains a practice of regular program reviews. Subcomponent 2. The institution evaluates all the credit that it transcripts, including what it awards for experiential learning or other forms of prior learning. Subcomponent 3. The institution has policies that assure the quality of the credit it accepts in transfer.

Subcomponent 4. The institution maintains and exercises authority over the prerequisites for courses, rigor of courses, expectations for student learning, access to learning resources, and faculty qualifications for all its programs, including dual credit programs. It assures that its dual credit courses or programs for high school students are equivalent in learning outcomes and levels of achievement to its higher education curriculum.

Subcomponent 5. The institution maintains specialized accreditation for its programs as appropriate to its educational purposes.

Subcomponent 6. The institution evaluates the success of its graduates. The institution assures

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 23 5/30/14

that the degree or certificate programs it represents as preparation for advanced study or employment accomplish these purposes. For all programs, the institution looks to indicators it deems appropriate to its mission, such as employment rates, admission rates to advanced degree programs, and participation rates in fellowships, internships, and special programs (e.g., Peace Corps and Americorps).



Evidence: The policies and procedures for credit evaluation are clearly documented in the College catalog. The procedures for evaluation of transfer credits, prior learning, course challenges, and CLEP are standardized and coordinated through the NMSU Registrar’s office. The College’s workforce programs maintain agreements with local agencies such as the New Mexico Law Enforcement academy to enable accurate evaluations of credentials earned through these agencies.

The College is part of the NMSU system. As such, courses that are taught throughout the system have common learning objectives and prerequisites. New Mexico has a state common core initiative that standardizes general outcomes for approximately 30 courses across all colleges and universities.

For courses that are taught at DACC and other community colleges, there is a defined process whereby faculty and administration from each of the campuses meet to develop new courses and programs. The process culminates in approval by the University Curriculum Committee, composed of representatives from the community colleges and the University. Discussion with the NMSU Deputy Provost confirms that the authority for the development of community college courses, applied degrees, and certificates rests primarily with the community college faculty, even though the program ultimately receives approval through the NMSU system.

Dual credit and the development of early college high schools are priorities of the State of New Mexico. All college courses completed under these formats are equivalent to those completed at a college. The courses use the same curriculum as classes taught at DACC by DACC approved faculty.

The process of program review at DACC has just begun. In discussions with administrators and faculty, program review has been acknowledged as an area for improvement. Very recently there has been an initiative to pilot elements of program review with several departments. The process is in its beginning stages and will need significant momentum to become institutionalized into the College’s planning processes. Data that inform programming decisions such as retention rates, success rates, and course enrollments have been provided to department deans and chairs, but has not yet been standardized and incorporated into an ongoing process to inform decisions about new programs and courses, programs and courses that are no longer viable, and general program effectiveness. Because of the preliminary nature of the program review process, evidence for evaluation of program success, outcomes, sustainability, and overall effectiveness is sporadic. Program

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 24 5/30/14

planning, such as that illustrated in the Bi-Annual Program Review and Institutional Planning Process (PRIP), does not appear to be supported by objective program data.

While many of the College’s programs maintain additional specialized accreditation, the actions leading up to and following the loss of the Nursing Program’s national accreditation point to serious problems within this area. Most significantly, it appears that communication among the key personnel involved with this situation has been limited and/or confusing. Two team members spoke with the Board of Regents and certain Board responses to the loss of accreditation were brought up. The NMSU executive vice-president/provost and the Associate Provost/Accreditation Liaison Officer had more lengthy conversation with the two team members about those responses such as the establishment of a Commission on Nursing Accreditation Oversight, whose charge it was to investigate the loss of accreditation and make recommendations to the President of NMSU. Another important action was the convening of a Strike Force to develop plans to deal with student issues related to the non-renewal of the Nursing Program’s accreditation; this was mentioned in one brief document in the electronic resource room.

Dental Hygiene and Dental Assisting programs are accredited by the Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA). While both areas maintain accreditation, the Dental Hygiene program’s status is listed as “Approval with Reporting Requirements.” According to the CODA website, this classification is “ . . .granted to an educational program indicating that specific deficiencies or weaknesses exist in one or more areas of the program.” Discussions with college personnel identified the deficiencies as difficulty with hiring qualified program faculty and administration. While this situation is not as serious as that of nursing, it reflects a common theme that the team heard from many different areas—a cumbersome and drawn out hiring process as managed by NMSU.

As a result of these issues, NMSU has taken several positive steps to work with DACC to resolve the apparent lack of communication and clear guidelines and reporting structures involving overall and specialized accreditations. Recommendations were also made to streamline the lengthy hiring process so that key personnel can be hired in a timely manner. Concerns remain, however, as to whether these are isolated incidents or whether it is a reflection of systemic problems.

The complex relationship between DACC and NMSU is mandated by law, however, it appears that improved overall communication and of clear lines of reporting and responsibilities can serve to avoid serious situations whereby a viable program can lose accreditation.

Core Component 4B: The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational achievement and improvement through ongoing assessment of student learning.

Subcomponent 1. The institution has clearly stated goals for student learning and effective processes for assessment of student learning and achievement of learning goals.

Subcomponent 2. The institution assesses achievement of the learning outcomes that it claims for its curricular and co-curricular programs.

Subcomponent 3. The institution uses the information gained from assessment to improve student learning.

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 25 5/30/14

Subcomponent 4. The institution’s processes and methodologies to assess student learning reflect good practice, including the substantial participation of faculty and other instructional staff members.


Evidence: DACC’s focus on and commitment to assessment is a strength of the institution. A culture of assessment is evident across academic and co-curricular areas. All courses and programs have defined learning objectives. The College addresses three levels of student assessment: institution-wide, program wide, and course wide. General education assessment is well defined and the college selects a single area on which to focus. This year the focus is on critical thinking and assessment activities were developed and implemented across campus. Interesting aspects of the critical thinking assessment are the implementation performance tasks in advisement and financial aid.

As part of the New Mexico State System, DACC follows the General Education Core Course Transfer Curriculum. This ensures that all general education courses that transfer within the system have the same documented learning outcomes. A review of the college’s assessment website confirms that each program has defined learning objectives. The college also provides a master syllabus, which clearly outlines the learning objectives for each course. The faculty have been leaders in assessment for many years and have demonstrated that role by leading statewide efforts to assess general education courses in the New Mexico Common Core. Through a statewide mandate in 2005, each institution of higher education in New Mexico was required to report on the assessment of the effectiveness of all courses and programs within the NM General Education Common Core. The DACC faculty are aware of and involved in this activity with the clear support of the college Assessment Coordinator. DACC has clearly stated general education student learning outcomes, and the General Education Assessment Committee plans and conducts college wide assessments related to these outcomes. As a result of the process, a sub-group was identified to focus on Critical Thinking assessment across the college. The College’s assessment website provides a repository for assessment plans and activities. It also provides forms and templates that enable faculty to have a “user friendly” approach to assessment. The plans and reports listed show that the programs assess student outcomes on a regular basis, they use reliable and valid instruments for the assessments and they document the actions that they have taken to “close the loop.” It is clear that the faculty conduct authentic assessment and use the results to inform and improve student learning. The DACC Assessment of Student Learning Committee has been active since 1997, and the group, along with sub-committees and task forces, has continued the work of assessment and built a visible “Culture of Assessment.”

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 26 5/30/14

Faculty are required to conduct classroom assessment, report on findings, and share changes made as a result of the assessment. New faculty are trained during orientation by the Assessment Coordinator, and that person also provides workshops to faculty groups and departments regularly. Assessment at the program level is also a requirement and is directed by the department chairs and program directors. During the site visit interviews, there were reports of some inconsistencies in terms of program assessment quality expectations across various programs. However, the process and procedures are well defined and intended to provide clear direction. DACC assesses the effectiveness of its student services by surveying students. The College has used these results to refine and improve its services. DACC has worked to make assessment a natural part of the College culture, and all areas are reviewed, assessed, and reported to the public. The transparency has helped to build a culture that does not fear assessment but rather uses data appropriately to inform the decision making process.

Core Component 4C: The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational improvement through ongoing attention to retention, persistence, and completion rates in its degree and certificate programs.

Subcomponent 1. The institution has defined goals for student retention, persistence, and completion that are ambitious but attainable and appropriate to its mission, student populations, and educational offerings.

Subcomponent 2. The institution collects and analyzes information on student retention, persistence, and completion of its programs.

Subcomponent 3. The institution uses information on student retention, persistence, and completion of programs to make improvements as warranted by the data.

Subcomponent 4. The institution’s processes and methodologies for collecting and analyzing information on student retention, persistence, and completion of programs reflect good practice. (Institutions are not required to use IPEDS definitions in their determination of persistence or completion rates. Institutions are encouraged to choose measures that are suitable to their student populations, but institutions are accountable for the validity of their measures.)



Evidence: DACC demonstrates commitment to educational improvement through several processes. One important process is the strategic planning process. The most recent Strategic Plan (2012-2016) identifies five priorities. Strategic Priorities One and Two focus directly on student retention, persistence, and completion. Strategic Priority One sets specific goals to increase graduation, completion, and transfer rates, while the second Strategic Priority sets goals to improve the student services and advising activities.

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 27 5/30/14

The College implemented and evaluated several initiatives to improve retention and completion in developmental level classes. Some examples are the Accelerated Developmental Math and English courses, learning communities, and fast-track workshops. Based on the data from these pilot studies, the college has planned for more of these types of activities through, Objective One of Strategic Priority One.

DACC demonstrates strong commitment to educational improvement and student success. The ongoing work of the Achieving the Dream (ATD) Committee is one example of this strength. The committee has worked to continuously improve student success. Under the auspices of the ATD Initiative, the Academic Readiness Center was developed. This dedicated space enables students in developmental classes to work with tutors and faculty to improve writing and math skills. They have a dedicated computer lab for the students. The initiative has expanded to include workshops for students, opportunities for in-class presentations for students, and help with written and oral communication assignments.

The Institutional Effectiveness and Planning Office (IEPO) plays a large role in the collection, analysis, and use of data for student success. Discussions with the office staff and review of the website confirm that this office provides excellent data and guidance for college-wide decision making. In addition to standardized collection, presentation, and interpretation of information related to student success, the Office provides resources for ad hoc evaluation of projects. Finally, the Office provides an organized clearinghouse for program planning. Discussions with personnel also support the assertion that the IEPO will provide guidance and support for the developing program review process. Team Determination on Criterion Four:

__ Criterion is met _X_ Criterion is met with concerns


Summary Statement on Criterion: In summary, assessment of student learning is a strength of DACC. Programs and courses have clear and well documented student learning outcomes. Faculty and staff understand and use assessment to improve outcomes. With respect to this criterion, however, there are two major concerns. The first is the absence (up until very recently) of an ongoing process of program review. The PRIP planning process is good; however it is mostly subjective. Departments document their strengths and weaknesses, they identify need for personnel and equipment, etc, but there are no objective data included in this process to support the claims. There is no standardized process to evaluate the effectiveness of a program. DACC has recognized this and has begun to pilot a true program review process. Since this initiative is relatively new and the college is experiencing a turn-over in administration, it is important to ensure that the program review process does not “fall off the radar,” as other pressing initiatives may arise. The second concern is that of events the leading to the loss of Nursing program accreditation and the subsequent institutional responses. The issues surrounding this loss may be symptomatic of more pervasive difficulties, for example, a lack of appropriate oversight of the specialized accreditation process. The College and University maintain that

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 28 5/30/14

the appointment of an NMSU staff person to oversee HLC issues in general should provide a remedy for this concern. While the team has been assured by NMSU and DACC leadership that there is improved communication, improved hiring processes, and a clarified structure for reporting and accountability, it is a great concern that a large program could have been placed on notice and lost accreditation before a definitive response was undertaken. This concern was exacerbated by the recent change in Dental Hygiene specialized accreditation from approval with no reporting” to “approval with reporting.”

CRITERION FIVE: Resources, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness. The institution’s resources, structures, and processes are sufficient to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its educational offerings, and respond to future challenges and opportunities. The institution plans for the future.

Core Component 5A: The institution’s resource base supports its current educational programs and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their quality in the future.

Subcomponent 1. The institution has the fiscal and human resources and physical and technological infrastructure sufficient to support its operations wherever and however programs are delivered. Subcomponent 2. The institution’s resource allocation process ensures that its educational purposes are not adversely affected by elective resource allocations to other areas or disbursement of revenue to a superordinate entity. Subcomponent 3. The goals incorporated into mission statements or elaborations of mission statements are realistic in light of the institution’s organization, resources, and opportunities. Subcomponent 4. The institution’s staff in all areas are appropriately qualified and trained. Subcomponent 5. The institution has a well-developed process in place for budgeting and for monitoring expense.

X Core Component is met __ Core Component is met with concerns __ Core Component is not met

Evidence: The College’s strategic goals, as set forth in its 2012-2016 Strategic Plan, are realistic in light of its current fiscal and human resources and facilities/infrastructure. The team reviewed the College’s financial data, faculty credentials, and facilities. The infrastructure is relatively new, due to millage support ($3.78M per year through one mill), is well-maintained, and the College carries no deferred maintenance balance. While the College’s fund balance is somewhat modest (10%) given that it is part of the University system, there is no significant concern about finances. On balance, it appears that DACC has adequate resources, staff and infrastructure to meet the needs of its current programs. Based on a review of its Faculty and Staff credentials, DACC faculty and staff are appropriately qualified to serve its current programs and activities. Interviews with faculty and staff indicate that most are satisfied with the level of support they receive for ongoing development and training. Further, NMSU offers a wide array of both in-person and online training through its Center for Learning and Professional Development. In addition, DACC faculty and staff are eligible to participate in this training under the umbrella of the NMSU system. The Center for Learning and Professional development also provides faculty and

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 29 5/30/14

staff with the option to request new or specialized training opportunities. DACC has a well-developed process in place to budget and track its expenses. Under its interim president, the College has also taken positive steps toward making this budgeting process more transparent and participative. DACC is encouraged to continue this trend toward more participation in its budgeting processes under the leadership of its incoming president. DACC has both a recently updated strategic plan and defined Program Review and Institutional Planning (PRIP) processes in place to guide its resource allocation process. Recently, DACC’s interim president created a transition taskforce comprised of faculty and staff to identify additional steps for making the current resource allocation and strategic planning processes more effective and collaborative. DACC’s leadership is encouraged to continue this dialogue with the faculty and staff in looking for ways to further improve its resource allocation processes.

Core Component 5B: The institution’s governance and administrative structures promote effective leadership and support collaborative processes that enable the institution to fulfill its mission.

Subcomponent 1. The institution has and employs policies and procedures to engage its internal constituencies—including its governing board, administration, faculty, staff, and students—in the institution’s governance.

Subcomponent 2. The governing board is knowledgeable about the institution; it provides oversight for the institution’s financial and academic policies and practices and meets its legal and fiduciary responsibilities.

Subcomponent 3. The institution enables the involvement of its administration, faculty, staff, and students in setting academic requirements, policy, and processes through effective structures for contribution and collaborative effort.

Team Determination: __ Core Component is met _X_ Core Component is met with concerns __ Core Component is not met

Evidence: DACC has written policies and a number of standing committees and groups (e.g., the Faculty Council) that appear to provide some opportunities for input on issues related to institutional governance and on the establishment of academic requirements, policies and procedures. However, the relationship between NMSU Board of Regents, the DACC Advisory board, and the DACC President is complex. Because of this complexity, there appears to be some confusion within the College community itself as to who is responsible for communications and actions, especially when reacting to complex or negative events. As a result, DACC does not appear to be in a position to effectively address certain complex issues it faces with a unified voice and purpose.

Actions taken by NMSU and DACC leading up to and subsequent to the loss of the nursing accreditation reveal a system where the channels of reporting, communication, and responsibility are difficult to understand and navigate. When asked by the HLC team members to explain/describe how the interactions are to function between the Board of

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 30 5/30/14

Regents, the DACC Advisory Board, and the DACC President, representatives of DACC repeatedly responded with the disclaimers that “it is complicated” but that it is “mandated by state statute.” While both of these statements are true, those in charge must be able to articulate how this shared responsibility is supposed to work in order to DACC to be able to make appropriate governance decisions. Clarity regarding this relationship could be provided through an expanded job description for the president, clear job responsibilities for the Board of Regents and the DACC Advisory Board, and detailed policies beyond the broad nature of the operational agreement between the University and the Advisory Board. NMSU/DACC must take steps to clarify these relationships so that they are understandable to administrators, faculty, and staff within the DACC system.

Core Component 5C: The institution engages in systematic and integrated planning.

Subcomponent 1. The institution allocates its resources in alignment with its mission and priorities.

Subcomponent 2. The institution links its processes for assessment of student learning, evaluation of operations, planning, and budgeting.

Subcomponent 3. The planning process encompasses the institution as a whole and considers the perspectives of internal and external constituent groups.

Subcomponent 4. The institution plans on the basis of a sound understanding of its current capacity. Institutional plans anticipate the possible impact of fluctuations in the institution’s sources of revenue, such as enrollment, the economy, and state support. Subcomponent 5. Institutional planning anticipates emerging factors, such as technology, demographic shifts, and globalization.


Evidence There is ample documentation of the planning processes at DACC. The self-study reports, and examination of documents confirms, that there are four interrelated planning processes at the college. These are:

• Strategic Planning—undertaken every four years, this college-wide process reviews and develops strategic initiatives that will guide the activities of the college.

• Program Review and Institutional Planning (PRIP)—undertaken every two years, this is the vehicle through which departments, both academic and non-academic set their operational agendas. The plans have a specific template and reporting process, allowing for continuity and accountability. The PRIP action plans are based on the College’s Strategic Initiatives for that cycle.

• Facilities Master Planning—a review of the current Facilities Master Plan (2009-2016) confirms that the process is ongoing, based on the mission of the College, involves multiple constituents, and based on information regarding enrollment and other demographic trends, and

• Budget and Equipment Request Processes—two related activities that are designed to allocate money for operations and equipment

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 31 5/30/14

With the implementation of the pilot program review process, the College planning activities will be supported and strengthened with objective and evaluative information from the programs.

Faculty and staff in numerous meetings pointed specifically to the effectiveness of the Equipment Request Process. The Information and Technology Advisory Committee (ITAC) examines requests and makes recommendations for purchase of major equipment and software. Discussions with the ITAC members revealed that they are concerned with planning for future needs and that they review and discuss technology standards in similar organizations. Further, this committee has developed a well-publicized equipment update plan. Many college employees indicated that this process should be emulated in other planning areas.

Core Component 5D: The institution works systematically to improve its performance.

Subcomponent 1. The institution develops and documents evidence of performance in its operations. Subcomponent 2. The institution learns from its operational experience and applies that learning to improve its institutional effectiveness, capabilities, and sustainability, overall and in its component parts.



Evidence: DACC works systematically to document and improve its performance. This is evidenced by the planning procedures and outcome reports. PRIPs not only include plans for the future but also include follow up reports on previous plan activities. The strategic planning process includes measurable outcomes for each Strategic Initiative and strategies for accountability and reporting of those outcomes. Other examples of this can be seen in the student evaluation of instruction, evaluation of faculty and the development of an annual notebook for each faculty member.

The Achieving the Dream (ATD) initiative has become part of DACC’s improvement process. Through the actions of the ATD Committee many initiatives were implemented and evaluated. Among these were the Accelerated Developmental Math and English courses, learning communities, and fast-track workshops.

The College maintains a SharePoint website where many of the College’s plans and reports are housed. This website provides a centralized location for documents, forms, reports, and other materials that provide continuity and documentation for the college’s processes. The Business and Finance section is an example of how sharing of information in one location can improve communication and foster more transparent operations. A review of the SharePoint site reveals that it is not consistently used by all areas. Some of the documents are up to date, while some are more than five years old. As the College personnel become more familiar with the use of the site, it has the potential for greatly improving communication as well as for documenting the College’s activities and outcomes.

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 32 5/30/14

Team Determination on Criterion Five: __ Criterion is met

_X_ Criterion is met with concerns __ Criterion is not met

Summary Statement on Criterion: Planning processes at DACC are systematic and integrated. There is evidence that the institution uses these processes to improve its operational practices and student outcomes. In addition, the college has infrastructure in place (SharePoint) to continue to improve in this area. Transparent processes have been instituted so that all college personnel have access to information needed to make decisions. The College has demonstrated success with PRIP and assessment processes that lead to improvement in operations and student learning outcomes. The College appears to be on sound financial footing in the achievement of its mission. A review of the College’s last two annual audits, financial information, a tour of facilities, as well as conversations with the Business Manager and the Vice President for Finance(who is also currently serving as interim president), reveal an organization that is financially sound. The College’s infrastructure and impressive facilities are well-managed and in good working order due, in part, to local millage support. The return of the Vice-President for Business and Finance to full-time status in the business and facilities functions of the College, effective June 1, 2014, will be a welcome refocusing of leadership and operations. The College’s positioning regarding finances and facilities not only is essential to the achievement of its mission, but it also provides a safe, welcoming and encouraging environment for students. DACC has sufficient resources—fiscal, human, and infrastructure-related—to carry out its educational programs, and to plan for its future. Its faculty and staff members are dedicated to their educational mission and have, at their disposal, adequate resources for on-going professional development. Despite having many of the building blocks in place (as described above) necessary for excellent organizational performance, the lack of clearly defined channels of communication and confusion over areas of responsibility that exist between DACC’s Advisory Board, the DACC administration, and NMSU Board of Regents are hampering DACC in being able to address areas needing improvement and to move forward with its educational mission. DACC must take steps to remedy this serious situation related to its governance structures.

V. TEAM RECOMMENDATION

A. Affiliation Status

1. Recommendation: Re-accreditation is confirmed

2. Timing for Next Reaffirmation Evaluation: 2023-2024

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 33 5/30/14

3. Rationale: While there are serious concerns that led the team to assign a Focused Visit in 18 months, the College continues to plan for its future, serve its students, maintain its financial stability, and otherwise carry out its mission in the community.

4. Criterion-related Monitoring Required (report, focused visit):

Monitoring: Focused Visit - January 2016

Rationale: The Team determined that the College does now meet all the Criteria for accreditation after particularly reviewing those Core Components that were determined not to be met during a May 2013 HLC Advisory Visit (3c and 5b). However, as related in the narrative in this report, it appears that there must be more sharing of information, and more clarity necessary in defining governance responsibilities, especially those of the Board of Regents, the DACC Advisory Board, and the DACC administration. There have also been numerous changes in administration at both New Mexico State University and DACC and new personnel are just now settling in. A new president will have taken office at DACC by the time this report goes through the approval pipeline; a new president and executive vice-president/provost are in place at the University as well. One key position remains in an interim status, the Vice President of Academic Affairs at DACC, an individual who reportedly has inspired confidence and has created transparency. This position, as it is eventually filled on a permanent basis, will be very important to addressing specialized accreditation, the student withdrawal issues, and other academic matters.

During the visit, the team learned that numerous initiatives had been put in place to regain the lost nursing program accreditation almost immediately after its loss and yet most of these efforts were not directly shared with the team with the exception of a brief mention in one electronic resource room document. The Comprehensive Team believes that, had more of this information been shared openly with the team members, there would have been much more confidence at the onset that the College is “on track” with addressing both its governance and communications issues and its path back to regaining nursing accreditation.

5. Federal Compliance Monitoring Required (report, focused visit):

Monitoring: Focused Visit - January 2016

Rationale: The team found that there are what appear to be poor practices in implementing financial aid regulations with a senior administrator overturning Financial Aid Office determinations made by the professional staff. These actions would seem to have the effect of treating “similarly situated” students differently with significant difference in the outcomes for the students. That is, a student may be placed on academic probation (or not), may owe the College money (or not), and may exceed his or her maximum timeframe (or not) depending on the status being changed through the retro-withdrawal process. The team learned after the visit that DACC administration has recently addressed the situation by changing the review process to have the responsibility for making exceptions to the withdrawal date for students reside with the interim Vice President for Academic Affairs. The College must be sure to document the new procedures, publish them so that students are aware of the new procedures, and document each case appropriately.

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 34 5/30/14

B. Commission Sanction or Adverse Action None VI. EMBEDDED CHANGES IN AFFILIATION STATUS

Did the team review any of the following types of change in the course of its evaluation? Check Yes or No for each type of change.

( ) Yes ( ) No Legal Status

( ) Yes ( ) No Degree Level

( X ) Yes ( ) No Program Change (Embedded Program Change document will be

Submitted along with the Comprehensive Report)

( ) Yes ( ) No Distance or Correspondence Education

( ) Yes ( ) No Contractual or Consortial Arrangements

( ) Yes ( ) No Mission or Student Body

( ) Yes ( ) No Clock or Credit Hour

( ) Yes ( ) No Additional Locations or Campuses

( ) Yes ( ) No Access to Notification

( ) Yes ( ) No Access to Expedited Desk Review

( ) Yes ( ) No Teach-out Arrangement

( ) Yes ( ) No Other Change

VII. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND EXPLANATIONS None.

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 35 5/30/14

Appendix A Interactions with Constituencies

ABE Program Coordinator Academic Deans and Directors – 15 Academic Leadership Team (Department and Program Chairs) – 20 Achieving the Dream Committee – 20 Administrative Council (President, VPs, AVPs, and their direct reports) – 29 Assessment of Student Learning Committee – 13

Associate Director, Office of Institutional Equity, New Mexico State University Associate Provost and Accreditation Liaison Officer, NMSU Associate Vice President, Academic Affairs Board of Regents, New Mexico State University – 3

Business Manager Campus Director (Gadsden Center) Course Articulation Committee – 2 Curriculum Development, Evaluation, and Delivery Taskforce – 10 DACC Advisory Board – 5 Dean and Associate Dean of Engineering, New Mexico State University Dean, Health and Public Services Programs Dean, Technical Studies Department Chair, Industrial Studies Deputy Provost, New Mexico State University Director of Admissions Director of Dental Hygiene Program Director of Financial Aid and Scholarships Director of Facilities Support Director of Marketing and Publications Director of Nursing Program Director of Public Relations and Development Engineering and Related Faculty (Prospective Engineering faculty, Technology faculty) – 8 Engineering – Meeting with Public Stakeholders - 5 ESL & Citizenship Coordinator Executive Director, Workforce Development and Training Executive Team – 9 Executive Vice-President/Provost, NMSU Facilities Manager Faculty and Staff Open Forum – Central Campus – 32 Faculty Forum – 53 (East Mesa Campus) Faculty Forum – 5 (Gadsden Campus) HLC Steering Committee - 29 HLC System Liaison HR Manager and Staff – 2 Information Technology Advisory Committee (ITAC) - 10 Institutional Effectiveness and Planning - 23 Learning Communities Committee - 17 (Faculty and staff) Online Faculty – 28 President, Incoming President, Interim (He is also the Vice President, Business and Finance) Public Forum – 2 (East Mesa Campus)

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 36 5/30/14

Public Forum – 5 local employers (Gadsden Campus) Quality Matters Meeting (Faculty and staff) - 19 Resource Allocation and Utilization Taskforce – 9 Staff Forum – 35 Strategic Planning Committee – 25 Student Forum – 76 (East Mesa Campus) Student Forum – 7 – (Gadsden Center) Student Services Staff – 4 (Gadsden Campus) Student Success Center & Academic Readiness Center personnel – 13 Transition Taskforce #1 - 9 Transition Taskforce #2 - 10 Vice President, Academic Affairs (Interim) Vice President, Student Services

Workforce Development Staff - 7

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 37 5/30/14

Appendix B Principal Documents, Materials, and Web Pages Reviewed

Academic Advising Performance Task Assessment Academic Readiness Center Concept Paper AFSCME Collective Bargaining Agreement Assessment Five-Year Summaries Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes Committee - Newsletters Assessment Outcomes – Arts and Humanities Assessment Outcomes – English and Communications Department Assessment Plan Evaluative Rubric Assessment Plan Template ATD Annual Reflection Narrative 2013 ATD Feedback Letter ATD Leader College Confirmation

Audited Financials FY 2012 and FY2013 Board Policies – Web Budget Committee Hearings FY13, FY14 Budget Request Memo FY15 Budget Memo Appendices FY15 (Revised) Building the Workforce and Growing our Economy…Highlights…Economic Impact Study -

2012 Business and Information Systems Division – Budget Request 2014-2015 Business Office Customer Satisfaction Survey – 2010 and 2013 Catalog and Student Handbook - 2013-2014 Class Schedules – Spring 2014, Summer 2014, Fall 2014 College Catalog Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA) – Letter, Feb. 19, 2014 - to Interim DACC

President re “approval with reporting requirements” Commission on Nursing Accreditation Oversight – Final Report Community Education Schedules – Summer 2014 and Spring 2014 Convocation Presentation – Spring 2014 Customized Training – One Stop Training Shop Customized Training – Truck Driver Training Brochure DACC Advisory Board Budget FY14 DACC Annual Financial Report – 2011-2012 DACC Annual Financial Report – 2012-2013 DACC Federal Compliance Document DACC Institutional Update – CFI 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 DACC Institutional Update - NFI 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 DACC Institutional Update - Financial FY13 Dental Hygiene Accreditation Update – Apr. 24, 2014 Dental Hygiene Self-Study, 2009 and 2010 Distance Learning Courses: BIOL 101 Human Biology and Lab BIOL 154 – Introduction to Anatomy & Physiology CEP 110 – Human Growth & Behavior CHSS 299 – Service Learning Health COMM 265 Principles of Human Communications ES 100 Introduction to Environmental Science

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 38 5/30/14

HLS 275 – Foundations of Health HLS 295 – Essentials of Public Health STAT 251 – Statistics for Business and the Behavioral Sciences WATR 275 – Water Certification Review Doña Ana Community College Financial Information – Institutional Update 2012-2013 for

New Mexico State University Doña Ana County Quick Facts from the U.S.Census Bureau Engineering – Associate of Science, Catalog Course Descriptions Engineering – Course Syllabi for Required Courses in new program Engineering – Internal and System Applications and Approval to Offer New AS Program Engineering Program - Substantive Change Application, Parts I and II – Feb. 2013 Facilities Master Plan 2009-2016 Faculty Handbook Faculty Performance Evaluation Timeline, Version 13 – Spring 2014 Federal Compliance Financial Aid Performance Task Assessment Fire Science Self-Study Freshman Guidebook 2012-2014 and 2013-2014 Gainful Employment Website Hiring Procedures: Faculty HLC – Advisory Visit Report – May 30-31, 2013 HLC Initial Accreditation Report – 2008 HLC – Letter from HLC President Sylvia Manning to Interim President Andrew Burke re the

Results of the Advisory Team Visit and Report HLC - Letter from Interim President Burke to President Sylvia Manning, Sept. 6, 2013 HLC - DACC Monitoring Report on Formal Written Procedures and Agreements for NMSU-

DACC – June 2010 HLC – NMSU/DACC Response to HLC Letter of Aug. 26, 2013 HLC - Nursing Program Response to HLC re Loss of Nursing Accreditation – Sept. 13, 2012 HLC Progress Report – June 2010 HLC Report on Change Visit – Sept. 19-20, 2011 HLC Special Non-Nursing Monitoring Report – May 1, 2013 HLC Spring 2014 Site Visit Update Report – DACC Nursing Program HLC Staff Analysis on Monitoring Report – July 2010 HLC – Third Party Comments Inceptia – Financial Avenue Local Tax Levy Information 2011 RBC Meeting our Mission Memo: Sept. 13, 2012; To T. Gallimore, VP for Accreditation Relations; Re Response to

letter of Aug. 15, 2012, from H. Huerta , President of DACC Memo: Aug. 29, 2012; NMSU re Nursing Program NMSU-DACC Proposed Degree Audit Document Nursing Program Self-Study for NLNAC - 2011-2012 One Stop Training Shop – Hot Summer Classes - 2014 Organizational Chart - September 4, 2013 Organizational Profile Paramedic Self-Study Plan – English 2011-2012 PRIP 2013: Looking back at the Decade PRIP 2013 – Arts and Humanities Department PRIP 2013 – Business Office Technology

NMSU-DACC/2884

Version 2.4 2013 39 5/30/14

PRIP2011-2013 – Electronics Technology PRIP 2011-2013 – Trade & Industrial Studies Division Professional Development Review Temporary Part-time Faculty – Apr.15, 2014 Program Review Memos – Apr. 2, 2014 – Nursing Assistant, Computer Assistant

Technology, and Electronics/Manufacturing Program Review Memo – Mar. 17, 2014 – Instructions Quick Facts 2013-2014 Report to the Community 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 Respiratory Therapy Update – Apr. 28, 2014 Rough Timetable (for Response to Loss of Nursing Accreditation) Schedules – Fall 2013, Spring 2014, Summer 2014, and Fall 2014 Self-Study 2014 Self-Study Committee Staff Demographics for DACC Fall 2013 Statement of Affiliation Status Strategic Plan 2012-2016 Strategic Planning Timeline 2012-2016 Strike Force – Draft Report Strike Force – Memo to Members from M. Pacheco, Interim President, Nov. 5, 2012 System-wide Course Alignment Initiative Trade and Industrial Equipment for Engineering Related Equipment Transition TF1 Resource Final Report – October 2013 Transition TF2 Curriculum Final Report – November 2013 Welding Program Review From the Website: Dacc.nmsu.edu/asl/assessment-of-common-cor.html Dacc.nmsu.edu/asl/assessment-toolbox.html Dacc.nmsu.edu/asl/DACC-assessment-of-gener.tml Dacc.nmsu.edu/ASL/documents/cla-final-report.pdf Dacc.nmsu.edu/asl/documents/newsletter-vol-5-oct-13.pdf Dacc.mnsu.edu/ASL/program-assessment-plans.html Dacc.mnsu.edu/fs/iep/assessment/docs/12_13report_CHEM.pdf Dacc.mnsu.edu/fs/iep/assessment/docs/12_13report_engl&comm.pdf Dacc.mnsu.edu/fs/iep/docs/Data%20Resources%5CPlanning%20Documents%5CFormative%20Evaluation%20Report%202008.pdf Dacc.mnsu.edu/fs/iep/docs/Draft%202013%20Factbook.pdf Gainful Employment Website

Version 2.4 2013 40 5/30/14

Appendix C Federal Compliance Worksheet

Federal Compliance Worksheet for Evaluation Teams Effective September 1, 2013 – August 31, 2014

Evaluation of Federal Compliance Components The team reviews each item identified in the Federal Compliance Guide and documents its findings in the appropriate spaces below. Teams should expect institutions to address these requirements with brief narrative responses and provide supporting documentation, where necessary. Generally, if the team finds in the course of this review that there are substantive issues related to the institution’s ability to fulfill the Criteria for Accreditation, such issues should be raised in appropriate sections of the Assurance Section of the Team Report or highlighted as such in the appropriate AQIP Quality Checkup Report. This worksheet outlines the information the team should review in relation to the federal requirements and provides spaces for the team’s conclusions in relation to each requirement. The team should refer to the Federal Compliance Guide for Institutions and Evaluation Teams in completing this worksheet. The Guide identifies applicable Commission policies and an explanation of each requirement. The worksheet becomes an appendix to the team’s report. If the team recommends monitoring on a Federal Compliance requirement in the form of a report or focused visit, it should be included in the Federal Compliance monitoring sections below and added to the appropriate section in the team report template.

Institution under review: Doña Ana Community College

Assignment of Credits, Program Length, and Tuition Address this requirement by completing the “Team Worksheet for Evaluating an Institution’s Assignment of Credit Hours and on Clock Hours” in the Appendix at the end of this document.

Institutional Records of Student Complaints The institution has documented a process in place for addressing student complaints and appears to be systematically processing such complaints as evidenced by the data on student complaints since the last comprehensive evaluation. 1. Review the process that the institution uses to manage complaints as well as the history of

complaints received and processed with a particular focus in that history on the past three or four years.

2. Determine whether the institution has a process to review and resolve complaints in a timely manner.

Version 2.4 2013 41 5/30/14

3. Verify that the evidence shows that the institution can, and does, follow this process and that it is able to integrate any relevant findings from this process into its review and planning processes.

4. Advise the institution of any improvements that might be appropriate.

5. Consider whether the record of student complaints indicates any pattern of complaints or otherwise raises concerns about the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation or Assumed Practices.

6. Check the appropriate response that reflects the team’s conclusions:

_X__ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.

___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.

___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

___ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

Comments: None Additional monitoring, if any:

Publication of Transfer Policies The institution has demonstrated it is appropriately disclosing its transfer policies to students and to the public. Policies contain information about the criteria the institution uses to make transfer decisions. 1. Review the institution’s transfer policies.

2. Review any articulation agreements the institution has in place, including articulation agreements at the institution level and program-specific articulation agreements.

3. Consider where the institution discloses these policies (e.g., in its catalog, on its web site) and how easily current and prospective students can access that information.

Determine whether the disclosed information clearly explains the criteria the institution uses to make transfer decisions and any articulation arrangements the institution has with other institutions. Note whether the institution appropriately lists its articulation agreements with other institutions on its website or elsewhere. The information the institution provides should include any program-specific articulation agreements in place and should clearly identify program-specific articulation agreements as such. Also, the information the institution provides should include whether the articulation agreement anticipates that the institution under Commission review: 1) accepts credit from the other institution(s) in the articulation agreement; 2) sends credits to the other institution(s) in the articulation agreements that it accepts; or 3) both offers and accepts credits with the other institution(s).

Version 2.4 2013 42 5/30/14







Practices for Verification of Student Identity The institution has demonstrated that it verifies the identity of students who participate in courses or programs provided to the student through distance or correspondence education and appropriately discloses additional fees related to verification to students and to protect their privacy. 1. Determine how the institution verifies that the student who enrolls in a course is the same

student who submits assignments, takes exams, and earns a final grade. The team should ensure that the institution’s approach respects student privacy.

2. Check that any fees related to verification and not included in tuition are explained to the students prior to enrollment in distance courses (e.g., a proctoring fee paid by students on the day of the proctored exam).


__X_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.





Version 2.4 2013 43 5/30/14

Title IV Program Responsibilities The institution has presented evidence on the required components of the Title IV Program. This requirement has several components the institution and team must address: General Program Requirements. The institution has provided the Commission with

information about the fulfillment of its Title IV program responsibilities, particularly findings from any review activities by the Department of Education. It has, as necessary, addressed any issues the Department raised regarding the institution’s fulfillment of its responsibilities in this area.

Financial Responsibility Requirements. The institution has provided the Commission with

information about the Department’s review of composite ratios and financial audits. It has, as necessary, addressed any issues the Department raised regarding the institution’s fulfillment of its responsibilities in this area. (Note that the team should also be commenting under Criterion Five if an institution has significant issues with financial responsibility as demonstrated through ratios that are below acceptable levels or other financial responsibility findings by its auditor.)

Default Rates. The institution has provided the Commission with information about its three

year default rate. It has a responsible program to work with students to minimize default rates. It has, as necessary, addressed any issues the Department raised regarding the institution’s fulfillment of its responsibilities in this area. Note for 2012 and thereafter institutions and teams should be using the three-year default rate based on revised default rate data published by the Department in September 2012; if the institution does not provide the default rate for three years leading up to the comprehensive evaluation visit, the team should contact Commission staff.

Campus Crime Information, Athletic Participation and Financial Aid, and Related Disclosures. The institution has provided the Commission with information about its disclosures. It has demonstrated, and the team has reviewed, the institution’s policies and practices for ensuring compliance with these regulations.

Student Right to Know. The institution has provided the Commission with information about its disclosures. It has demonstrated, and the team has reviewed, the institution’s policies and practices for ensuring compliance with these regulations. The disclosures are accurate and provide appropriate information to students. (Note that the team should also be commenting under Criterion One if the team determines that disclosures are not accurate or appropriate.)

Satisfactory Academic Progress and Attendance. The institution has provided the Commission with information about policies and practices for ensuring compliance with these regulations. The institution has demonstrated that the policies and practices meet state or federal requirements and that the institution is appropriately applying these policies and practices to students. In most cases, teams should verify that these policies exist and are available to students, typically in the course catalog or student handbook. Note that the Commission does not necessarily require that the institution take attendance but does anticipate that institutional attendance policies will provide information to students about attendance at the institution.

Version 2.4 2013 44 5/30/14

Contractual Relationships. The institution has presented a list of its contractual

relationships related to its academic program and evidence of its compliance with Commission policies requiring notification or approval for contractual relationships (If the team learns that the institution has a contractual relationship that may require Commission approval and has not received Commission approval the team must require that the institution complete and file the change request form as soon as possible. The team should direct the institution to review the Contractual Change Application on the Commission’s web site for more information.)

Consortial Relationships. The institution has presented a list of its consortial relationships related to its academic program and evidence of its compliance with Commission policies requiring notification or approval for consortial relationships. (If the team learns that the institution has a consortial relationship that may require Commission approval and has not received Commission approval the team must require that the institution complete and file the form as soon as possible. The team should direct the institution to review the Consortial Change Application on the Commission’s web site for more information.)

1. Review all of the information that the institution discloses having to do with its Title IV

program responsibilities.

2. Determine whether the Department has raised any issues related to the institution’s compliance or whether the institution’s auditor in the A-133 has raised any issues about the institution’s compliance as well as look to see how carefully and effectively the institution handles its Title IV responsibilities.

3. If an institution has been cited or is not handling these responsibilities effectively, indicate that finding within the federal compliance portion of the team report and whether the institution appears to be moving forward with corrective action that the Department has determined to be appropriate.

4. If issues have been raised with the institution’s compliance, decide whether these issues relate to the institution’s ability to satisfy the Criteria for Accreditation, particularly with regard to whether its disclosures to students are candid and complete and demonstrate appropriate integrity (Core Component 2.A and 2.B).


___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.


_X__ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

_X__ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (Criterion 2B).

Comments:

As noted in the Report of a Comprehensive Evaluation Visit, the Team has concerns regarding the following elements: 1) The apparent use of ‘Retro-Withdrawal/Retro-

Version 2.4 2013 45 5/30/14

Cancellation’ practices has not been consistently applied; the new process for reviewing student appeals needs to be documented in policy; 2) Student Right to Know/Clery Act data for DACC are combined with New Mexico State University data so that it is not possible to identify the individual data for DACC; and 3) The reported default rate at DACC also includes the combined data of both MNSU and DACC. The College may wish to consider, as they continue as a separately accredited institution, that reporting the data referenced in #2 and #3 above separately from NMSU might be a more fair representation of its actual circumstance and a more clear way to communicate this information with its prospective and current students and other stakeholders.

Additional monitoring, if any: Federal Compliance Monitoring as a part of a Focused Visit, due January 2016.

Required Information for Students and the Public 1. Verify that the institution publishes fair, accurate, and complete information on the following

topics: the calendar, grading, admissions, academic program requirements, tuition and fees, and refund policies.


_X_The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.





Advertising and Recruitment Materials and Other Public Information The institution has documented that it provides accurate, timely and appropriately detailed information to current and prospective students and the public about its accreditation status with the Commission and other agencies as well as about its programs, locations and policies. 1. Review the institution’s disclosure about its accreditation status with the Commission to

determine whether the information it provides is accurate and complete, appropriately formatted and contains the Commission’s web address.

Version 2.4 2013 46 5/30/14

2. Review institutional disclosures about its relationship with other accrediting agencies for accuracy and for appropriate consumer information, particularly regarding the link between specialized/professional accreditation and the licensure necessary for employment in many professional or specialized areas.

3. Review the institution’s catalog, brochures, recruiting materials, and information provided by the institution’s advisors or counselors to determine whether the institution provides accurate information to current and prospective students about its accreditation, placement or licensure, program requirements, etc.


___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.

_X__ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.


_X_ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

Comments: As noted previously in the Report of a Comprehensive Evaluation Visit, the

Team has concerns regarding its communication of its accreditation status with the Commission to the public. Numerous printed and distributed institutional documents, included no indication of its relationship to the Commission, nor its accreditation status. Additionally, the College’s web page was unclear as to the independent nature of DACC from NMSU.

Additional monitoring, if any:

Review of Student Outcome Data 1. Review the student outcome data the institution collects to determine whether it is

appropriate and sufficient based on the kinds of academic programs it offers and the students it serves.

2. Determine whether the institution uses this information effectively to make decisions about academic programs and requirements and to determine its effectiveness in achieving its educational objectives.


X_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.


Version 2.4 2013 47 5/30/14




Standing with State and Other Accrediting Agencies The institution has documented that it discloses accurately to the public and the Commission its relationship with any other specialized, professional or institutional accreditor and with all governing or coordinating bodies in states in which the institution may have a presence. The team has considered any potential implications for accreditation by the Higher Learning Commission of sanction or loss of status by the institution with any other accrediting agency or loss of authorization in any state. Important note: If the team is recommending initial or continued status, and the institution is now or has been in the past five years under sanction or show-cause with, or has received an adverse action (i.e., withdrawal, suspension, denial, or termination) from, any other federally recognized specialized or institutional accreditor or a state entity, then the team must explain the sanction or adverse action of the other agency in the body of the Assurance Section of the Team Report and provide its rationale for recommending Commission status in light of this action. In addition, the team must contact the staff liaison immediately if it learns that the institution is at risk of losing its degree authorization or lacks such authorization in any state in which the institution meets state presence requirements.

1. Review the information, particularly any information that indicates the institution is under sanction or show-cause or has had its status with any agency suspended, revoked, or terminated, as well as the reasons for such actions.

2. Determine whether this information provides any indication about the institution’s capacity to meet the Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation. Should the team learn that the institution is at risk of losing, or has lost, its degree or program authorization in any state in which it meets state presence requirements, it should contact the Commission staff liaison immediately.




Version 2.4 2013 48 5/30/14



Comments: While DACC has lost its nursing accreditation, it is on a path to regain the lost

accreditation. There is significant narrative in the Comprehensive Visit Report about their efforts to regain accreditation.

Additional monitoring, if any:

Public Notification of Opportunity to Comment The institution has made an appropriate and timely effort to solicit third party comments. The team has evaluated any comments received and completed any necessary follow-up on issues raised in these comments. Note that if the team has determined that any issues raised by third-party comment relate to the team’s review of the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation, it must discuss this information and its analysis in the body of the Assurance Section of the Team Report. 1. Review information about the public disclosure of the upcoming visit, including sample

announcements, to determine whether the institution made an appropriate and timely effort to notify the public and seek comments.

2. Evaluate the comments to determine whether the team needs to follow-up on any issues through its interviews and review of documentation during the visit process.


__X_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.





Institutional Materials Related to Federal Compliance Reviewed by the Team Provide a list materials reviewed here:

Version 2.4 2013 49 5/30/14

AFSCME Collective Bargaining Agreement ATD Leader College Confirmation and Feedback ATD Feedback Letter ATD Annual Reflection Narrative 2013 Audited Financials - FY 2012 and FY2013 Budget Committee Hearings FY2013 and FY 2014 Budget Memo Appendices FY ‘15 (Revised) Budget Request Memo FY ‘15 Business & Information Systems Divisions – Budget Request 2014-2015 Catalog and Student Handbook – 2013-2014 Commission on Nursing Accreditation Oversight – Final Report Community Education Schedule – Spring 2014 and Summer 2014 Business & Information Systems Divisions – Budget Request 2014-2015 DACC Advisory Board Budget FY 2014 DACC Federal Compliance Document DACC Web pages Faculty Handbook Faculty Performance Evaluation Timeline, Version 13 – Spring 2014 Financial Aid Files – Random Review Financial Aid Performance Task Assessment Gainful Employment Website HLC - Third Party Comments for New Mexico State University-Doña Ana Community College - April 13, 2014 HLC Monitoring Report – June 2010 HLC Special Non-Nursing Monitoring Report – May 1, 2013 Inceptia Financial Aid Default Reduction Plan– Financial Avenue Institutional Update 2012-2013 for New Mexico State University – Doña AnaCommunity

College Financial Information Institutional Update Financial FY ‘13 Letter: 09.06.2013; To S. Manning, President of HLC; From A. Burke, President DACC Local Tax Levy Information – 2011 - RBC Memo: 11.05.12; To Members of the Strike Force; Re: Strike Force; From M. Pacheco, Interim President Memo: 09.13.12; To T. Gallimore, VP for Accreditation Relations; Re: Response to letter of 08.15.12; From M. Huerta, President of DACC New Employee Handbook NMSU Annual Financial Report FY ‘13 NMSU DACC Response to HLC Letter of 08.26.13 PRIP 2013: Looking Back at the Decade Organizational Chart – Sept. 2013 Quick Facts 2013-2014 Report to the Community 2011-2012 Report to the Community 2012-2013 Response Letter to NLNAC – Aug. 15, 2012 Schedule – Fall 2013, Spring 2014, Summer 2014, and Fall 2014

Version 2.4 2013 50 5/30/14

Self-Study 2014 Strategic Plan 2012-2016

Version 2.4 2013 51 5/30/14

Appendix

Team Worksheet for Evaluating an

Institution’s Program Length and Tuition, Assignment of Credit Hours and on Clock Hours

Institution under review: Doña Ana Community College Part 1: Program Length and Tuition Instructions The institution has documented that it has credit hour assignments and degree program lengths within the range of good practice in higher education and that tuition is consistent across degree programs (or that there is a rational basis for any program-specific tuition). Review the “Worksheet for Use by Institutions on the Assignment of Credit Hours and on Clock Hours” as well as the course catalog and other attachments required for the institutional worksheet.

Worksheet on Program Length and Tuition A. Answer the Following Questions

Are the institution’s degree program requirements within the range of good practice in higher education and contribute to an academic environment in which students receive a rigorous and thorough education?

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

Are the institution’s tuition costs across programs within the range of good practice in higher education and contribute to an academic environment in which students receive a rigorous and thorough education?

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

B. Recommend Commission Follow-up, If Appropriate

Is any Commission follow-up required related to the institution’s program length and tuition practices?

Version 2.4 2013 52 5/30/14

____ Yes __X__ No

Rationale:

Identify the type of Commission monitoring required and the due date:

Part 2: Assignment of Credit Hours Instructions In assessing the appropriateness of the credit allocations provided by the institution the team should complete the following steps:

1. Review the Worksheet completed by the institution, which provides information about an

institution’s academic calendar and an overview of credit hour assignments across institutional offerings and delivery formats, and the institution’s policy and procedures for awarding credit hours. Note that such policies may be at the institution or department level and may be differentiated by such distinctions as undergraduate or graduate, by delivery format, etc.

2. Identify the institution’s principal degree levels and the number of credit hours for degrees at

each level. The following minimum number of credit hours should apply at a semester institution:

• Associate’s degrees = 60 hours

• Bachelor’s degrees = 120 hours

• Master’s or other degrees beyond the Bachelor’s = at least 30 hours beyond the Bachelor’s degree

• Note that one quarter hour = .67 semester hour

• Any exceptions to this requirement must be explained and justified. 3. Scan the course descriptions in the catalog and the number of credit hours assigned for

courses in different departments at the institution.

• At semester-based institutions courses will be typically be from two to four credit hours (or approximately five quarter hours) and extend approximately 14-16 weeks (or approximately 10 weeks for a quarter). The description in the catalog should indicate a course that is appropriately rigorous and has collegiate expectations for objectives and workload. Identify courses/disciplines that seem to depart markedly from these expectations.

• Institutions may have courses that are in compressed format, self-paced, or otherwise alternatively structured. Credit assignments should be reasonable. (For example, as a full-time load for a traditional semester is typically 15 credits, it might be expected that the norm for a full-time load in a five-week term is 5 credits; therefore, a single five-week course awarding 10 credits would be subject to inquiry and justification.)

• Teams should be sure to scan across disciplines, delivery mode, and types of academic activities.

Version 2.4 2013 53 5/30/14

• Federal regulations allow for an institution to have two credit-hour awards: one award for Title IV purposes and following the above federal definition and one for the purpose of defining progression in and completion of an academic program at that institution. Commission procedure also permits this approach.

4. Scan course schedules to determine how frequently courses meet each week and what other scheduled activities are required for each course. Pay particular attention to alternatively-structured or other courses with particularly high credit hours for a course completed in a short period of time or with less frequently scheduled interaction between student and instructor.

5. Sampling. Teams will need to sample some number of degree programs based on the

headcount at the institution and the range of programs it offers.

• At a minimum, teams should anticipate sampling at least a few programs at each degree level.

• For institutions with several different academic calendars or terms or with a wide range of academic programs, the team should expand the sample size appropriately to ensure that it is paying careful attention to alternative format and compressed and accelerated courses.

• Where the institution offers the same course in more than one format, the team is advised to sample across the various formats to test for consistency.

• For the programs the team sampled, the team should review syllabi and intended learning outcomes for several of the courses in the program, identify the contact hours for each course, and expectations for homework or work outside of instructional time.

• The team should pay particular attention to alternatively-structured and other courses that have high credit hours and less frequently scheduled interaction between the students and the instructor.

• Provide information on the samples in the appropriate space on the worksheet. 6. Consider the following questions:

• Does the institution’s policy for awarding credit address all the delivery formats employed by the institution?

• Does that policy address the amount of instructional or contact time assigned and homework typically expected of a student with regard to credit hours earned?

• For institutions with courses in alternative formats or with less instructional and homework time than would be typically expected, does that policy also equate credit hours with intended learning outcomes and student achievement that could be reasonably achieved by a student in the timeframe allotted for the course?

• Is the policy reasonable within the federal definition as well as within the range of good practice in higher education? (Note that the Commission will expect that credit hour policies at public institutions that meet state regulatory requirements or are dictated by the state will likely meet federal definitions as well.)

Version 2.4 2013 54 5/30/14

• If so, is the institution’s assignment of credit to courses reflective of its policy on the award of credit?

7. If the answers to the above questions lead the team to conclude that there may be a

problem with the credit hours awarded the team should recommend the following:

• If the problem involves a poor or insufficiently-detailed institutional policy, the team should call for a revised policy as soon as possible by requiring a monitoring report within no more than one year that demonstrates the institution has a revised policy and evidence of implementation.

• If the team identifies an application problem and that problem is isolated to a few courses or single department or division or learning format, the team should call for follow-up activities (monitoring report or focused evaluation) to ensure that the problems are corrected within no more than one year.

• If the team identifies systematic non-compliance across the institution with regard to the award of credit, the team should notify Commission staff immediately and work with staff to design appropriate follow-up activities. The Commission shall understand systematic noncompliance to mean that the institution lacks any policies to determine the award of academic credit or that there is an inappropriate award of institutional credit not in conformity with the policies established by the institution or with commonly accepted practices in higher education across multiple programs or divisions or affecting significant numbers of students.

Worksheet on Assignment of Credit Hours A. Identify the Sample Courses and Programs Reviewed by the Team (see #5 of

instructions in completing this section) B. Answer the Following Questions

1) Institutional Policies on Credit Hours Does the institution’s policy for awarding credit address all the delivery formats

employed by the institution? (Note that for this question and the questions that follow an institution may have a single comprehensive policy or multiple policies.)

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

Does that policy relate the amount of instructional or contact time provided and homework typically expected of a student to the credit hours awarded for the classes offered in the delivery formats offered by the institution? (Note that an institution’s policy must go beyond simply stating that it awards credit solely based on assessment of student learning and should also reference instructional time.)

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

Version 2.4 2013 55 5/30/14

For institutions with non-traditional courses in alternative formats or with less

instructional and homework time than would be typically expected, does that policy equate credit hours with intended learning outcomes and student achievement that could be reasonably achieved by a student in the timeframe and utilizing the activities allotted for the course?

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

Is the policy reasonable within the federal definition as well as within the range of good practice in higher education? (Note that the Commission will expect that credit hour policies at public institutions that meet state regulatory requirements or are dictated by the state will likely meet federal definitions as well.)

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

2) Application of Policies Are the course descriptions and syllabi in the sample academic programs reviewed by

the team appropriate and reflective of the institution’s policy on the award of credit? (Note that the Commission will expect that credit hour policies at public institutions that meet state regulatory requirements or are dictated by the state will likely meet federal definitions as well.)

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

Are the learning outcomes in the sample reviewed by the team appropriate to the courses and programs reviewed and in keeping with the institution’s policy on the award of credit?

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

If the institution offers any alternative delivery or compressed format courses or programs, were the course descriptions and syllabi for those courses appropriate and reflective of the institution’s policy on the award of academic credit?

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

If the institution offers alternative delivery or compressed format courses or programs, are the learning outcomes reviewed by the team appropriate to the courses and programs reviewed and in keeping with the institution’s policy on the award of credit?

Version 2.4 2013 56 5/30/14

Are the learning outcomes reasonably capable of being fulfilled by students in the time allocated to justify the allocation of credit?

_X___ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

Is the institution’s actual assignment of credit to courses and programs across the institution reflective of its policy on the award of credit and reasonable and appropriate within commonly accepted practice in higher education?

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None C. Recommend Commission Follow-up, If Appropriate

Review the responses provided in this section. If the team has responded “no” to any of the questions above, the team will need to assign Commission follow-up to assure that the institution comes into compliance with expectations regarding the assignment of credit hours.

Is any Commission follow-up required related to the institution’s credit hour policies and practices?

____ Yes __X__ No

Rationale:


D. Identify and Explain Any Findings of Systematic Non-Compliance in One or More

Educational Programs with Commission Policies Regarding the Credit Hour

Version 2.4 2013 57 5/30/14

Part 3: Clock Hours

Does the institution offer any degree or certificate programs in clock hours?

____ Yes __X__ No

Does the institution offer any degree or certificate programs that must be reported to the Department of Education in clock hours for Title IV purposes even though students may earn credit hours for graduation from these programs?

____ Yes __X__ No

If the answer to either question is “Yes,” complete this part of the form. Instructions This worksheet is not intended for teams to evaluate whether an institution has assigned credit hours relative to contact hours in accordance with the Carnegie definition of the credit hour. This worksheet solely addresses those programs reported to the Department of Education in clock hours for Title IV purposes.

Complete this worksheet only if the institution offers any degree or certificate programs in clock hours OR that must be reported to the U.S. Department of Education in clock hours for Title IV purposes even though students may earn credit hours for graduation from these programs. Non-degree programs subject to clock hour requirements (an institution is required to measure student progress in clock hours for federal or state purposes or for graduates to apply for licensure) are not subject to the credit hour definitions per se but will need to provide conversions to semester or quarter hours for Title IV purposes. Clock-hour programs might include teacher education, nursing, or other programs in licensed fields. For these programs Federal regulations require that they follow the federal formula listed below. If there are no deficiencies identified by the accrediting agency in the institution’s overall policy for awarding semester or quarter credit, accrediting agency may provide permission for the institution to provide less instruction provided that the student’s work outside class in addition to direct instruction meets the applicable quantitative clock hour requirements noted below. Federal Formula for Minimum Number of Clock Hours of Instruction (34 CFR §668.8) 1 semester or trimester hour must include at least 37.5 clock hours of instruction 1 quarter hour must include at least 25 clock hours of instruction Note that the institution may have a lower rate if the institution’s requirement for student work outside of class combined with the actual clock hours of instruction equals the above formula provided that a semester/trimester hour includes at least 30 clock hours of actual instruction and a quarter hour include at least 20 semester hours.

Worksheet on Clock Hours A. Answer the Following Questions

Version 2.4 2013 58 5/30/14

Does the institution’s credit to clock hour formula match the federal formula?

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

If the credit to clock hour conversion numbers are less than the federal formula, indicate what specific requirements there are, if any, for student work outside of class?

Did the team determine that the institution’s credit hour policies are reasonable within the federal definition as well as within the range of good practice in higher education? (Note that if the team answers “No” to this question, it should recommend follow-up monitoring in section C below.)

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None

Did the team determine in reviewing the assignment of credit to courses and programs across the institution that it was reflective of the institution’s policy on the award of credit and reasonable and appropriate within commonly accepted practice in higher education?

__X__ Yes ____ No

Comments: None B. Does the team approve variations, if any, from the federal formula in the institution’s

credit to clock hour conversion?

____ Yes _X___ No (Note that the team may approve a lower conversion rate than the federal rate as noted

above provided the team found no issues with the institution’s policies or practices related to the credit hour and there is sufficient student work outside of class as noted in the instructions.)

C. Recommend Commission Follow-up, If Appropriate

Is any Commission follow-up required related to the institution’s clock hour policies and practices?

____ Yes __X__ No

Rationale:


STATEMENT OF AFFILIATION STATUS WORKSHEET INSTITUTION and STATE: New Mexico State University-Dona Ana Community College NM TYPE OF REVIEW: Comprehensive Evaluation DESCRIPTION OF REVIEW: Visit will include evaluation of a request to offer a General Engineering Program. DATES OF REVIEW: 04/28/2014 - 04/30/2014

No Change in Statement of Affiliation Status

Nature of Organization

CONTROL: Public RECOMMENDATION:

DEGREES AWARDED: Certificate, Associates RECOMMENDATION: No Change

Conditions of Affiliation

STIPULATIONS ON AFFILIATION STATUS: None. RECOMMENDATION: No Change

APPROVAL OF NEW ADDITIONAL LOCATIONS: Prior Commission approval required. RECOMMENDATION: No Change

APPROVAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION DEGREES:

Recommendations for the STATEMENT OF AFFILIATION STATUS

Approved for distance education courses and programs. RECOMMENDATION: No Change

ACCREDITATION ACTIVITIES: Institutional Change, Program: 04/28/2014; Request to offer the Associate of Science in General Engineering program. RECOMMENDATION: Focused Visit January 2016 on governance, program review and leadership, ethical and responsible conduct and federal financial aid processes.

Summary of Commission Review

YEAR OF LAST REAFFIRMATION OF ACCREDITATION: 2008 - 2009

YEAR FOR NEXT REAFFIRMATION OF ACCREDITATION: 2013 - 2014 RECOMMENDATION: 2023-2024

ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE WORKSHEET

INSTITUTION and STATE: 2884 New Mexico State University-Dona Ana Community College NM TYPE OF REVIEW: PEAQ: Comprehensive Evaluation DESCRIPTION OF REVIEW: Visit will include evaluation of a request to offer a General Engineering Program.

No change to Organization Profile

Educational Programs Programs leading to Undergraduate Program Distribution Associates 39 +1 =40 Bachelors 0 Programs leading to Graduate Masters 0 Specialist 0 Doctors 0 Certificate programs Certificate 14 Recommended Change: Embedded change approved: Plus 1 at associates level = 40 Off-Campus Activities: In State - Present Activity Campuses: None. Additional Locations: Gadsden Center - Anthony, NM Chaparral Center - Chaparral, NM Hatch Center - Hatch, NM Arrowhead Early College High School - Las Cruces, NM Workforce Center - Las Cruces, NM Central Campus - Las Cruces, NM Sunland Park Center - Sunland Park, NM Recommended Change: No Change


Out Of State - Present Activity Campuses: None. Additional Locations: None. Recommended Change: No Change Out of USA - Present Activity Campuses: None. Additional Locations: None. Recommended Change: No Change Distance Education Programs: Present Offerings: Associate 24.0102 General Studies General Studies Internet Associate 24.0102 General Studies Associate of Arts Internet Associate 43.0104 Criminal Justice/Safety Studies Criminal Justice Internet Associate 25.0301 Library and Archives Assisting Library Science Internet Certificate 25.0301 Library and Archives Assisting Library and Information Technology - Certificate Internet Associate 51.2201 Public Health, General Public Health Internet Associate 52.0201 Business Administration and Management, General Business Management Internet Certificate 52.0201 Business Administration and Management, General Business Management Internet Associate 52.0401 Administrative Assistant and Secretarial Science, General Business Office Technology Internet Associate 13.1210 Early Childhood Education and Teaching Early Childhood Education Internet Associate 13.0101 Education, General Education Program Internet Associate 51.0707 Health Information/Medical Records Technology/Technician Health and Information Technology Internet Certificate 51.0707 Health Information/Medical Records Technology/Technician Health Information Technology Internet Associate 52.0101 Business/Commerce, General Pre-Business Internet


Associate 11.0301 Data Processing and Data Processing Technology/Technician Computer and Information Technology Internet Certificate 11.0301 Data Processing and Data Processing Technology/Technician Computer and Information Technology Internet Associate 22.0302 Legal Assistant/Paralegal Paralegal Studies Internet Associate 52.0901 Hospitality Administration/Management, General Hospitality and Tourism Management Internet Certificate 25.0301 Library and Archives Assisting Library Assistant/Technician: Fundamentals Internet Certificate 25.0301 Library and Archives Assisting Library Assistant/Technician: Specialized Topics Internet Certificate 25.0301 Library and Archives Assisting Library Assistant./Technician: Customized Studies Internet Certificate 51.0714 Medical Insurance Specialist/Medical Biller Business Technology: Medical Billing Internet Associate 24.0102 General Studies Associate of Science Internet Associate 43.0203 Fire Science/Fire-fighting Fire Science Technology Internet Associate 52.0901 Hospitality Administration/Management, General Hospitality Services Management Internet Certificate 25.0102 Children and Youth Library Services Children and Youth Library Services Internet Recommended Change: No Change Correspondence Education Programs: Present Offerings: None. Recommended Change: No Change Contractual Relationships: Present Offerings: None. Recommended Change: No Change


Consortial Relationships: Present Offerings: None. Recommended Change: No Change