1. Addressing Past Recommendations; Substantive Change Reports; & Eligibility Requirements Carlotta Campbell, College of Alameda Maggie Taylor, Fresno City College ASCCC Accreditation Institute 2010

2. Presentation Overview Introductions Eligibility Requirements Substantive Change Reports Addressing Past Recommendations Issues and concerns ASCCC Accreditation Institute 2010

3. Eligibility Requirements Institutions are expected to: – completely meet all requirements – periodically validate continuous compliance First Impression – Presents a picture of the college ACCJC, “Self-Study Manual”, August 2008 ASCCC Accreditation Institute 2010

4. Eligibility Requirements (21) Authority Mission Governing Board Chief Executive Office Administrative Capacity Operational Status Degrees Education Programs Academic Credit Student Learning & Achievement General Education Academic Freedom Faculty Student Services Admissions Information & Learning Resources Financial Resources Financial Accountability Institutional Planning & Evaluation Public Information Relations with ACCJC ASCCC Accreditation Institute 2010

5. Substantive Change Reports Reportable changes (7) – Mission, scope or name of institution – Nature of constituency served – Location or geographical area served – Legal status, form of control, or ownership – Courses, Programs or Mode of Delivery – Credit Awards – Any other significant change ACCJC, “Substantive Change Manual”, August 2009 ASCCC Accreditation Institute 2010

6. Courses, Programs, Mode of Delivery Addition of program or courses – Represent “significant departure” Addition of new degree or vocational certificate program – Represent “significant departure” Distance Education or Electronic Delivery – 50% or more of program ASCCC Accreditation Institute 2010

7. Substantive Change In doubt, – ask if the changes are considered substantive Remember – No changes approved within 6 months of comprehensive visit – action on changes deferred while on sanctions Examples: – The HIT program offers 80% of its courses in DE. – New Child Development Program – New Wind Technology Program ASCCC Accreditation Institute 2010

8. Past Recommendations Most recent comprehensive evaluation – What were the recommendations? – Do they carry over from previous visits? – Are they older than 2 years? “Concisely” address the recommendations – Each recommendation is addressed – Expected that deficiencies were resolved ACCJC, “Self-Study Manual”, August 2008 ASCCC Accreditation Institute 2010

9. College Fictitious Comprehensive visit in 2010 – Past recommendations from 2004: Complete outstanding performance evaluations No evidence of planning What are the priorities? What’s the timetable? Who should be involved in addressing the recommendations? What are the resources? ASCCC Accreditation Institute 2010

10. Resources http://accjc.org/publications.htm ACCJC/WASC Self-Study Workshop ASCCC Accreditation Institute 2010