Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MONITORING OF SUBGRANTEES
Advertisements

PAINLESS PERIODIC REVIEW Cynthia Steinhoff Anne Arundel Community College Arnold, Maryland.
Accreditation Liaison Officers (ALOs)
Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation
Presented by Dr. Tanmay Pramanik Overview of On-Site Team Evaluation.
Starting Planning for the 2010 Policy Key Issues Notes for the TAC Executive Committee April 8, 2009 Phil Hattis, AIAA VP for Public Policy.
Planning for Academic Program Review Site Visits
An Overview of the Accreditation Process and Important Policies Megan Scanlan, Director of Accreditation, Stacy Wright, Site Visit.
Orientation for Academic Program Reviews
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study) Flex Activity March 1, 2012 Lassen Community College.
Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
A Possible SE 685 Project Automated Reviewers’ Report For ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology)
PILOT PROJECT: External audit of quality assurance system on HEIs Agency for Science and Higher Education Zagreb, October 2007.
Continuing Accreditation The Higher Learning Commission provides institutional accreditation through the evaluation of the entire university organization.
Accreditation Update COLLEGE of Alameda Fall 2014.
Davenport University Strategic Planning, Goal Development and Budget Process December 15, 2009.
National Commission for Academic Accreditation & Assessment Developmental Reviews at King Saud University and King Faisal University.
On-line briefing for Program Directors and Staff 1.
GOVERNOR’S EARLY CHILDHOOD ADVISORY COUNCIL (ECAC) September 9, 2014.
GMEOC Internal Review Refresher for Review Participants on Process & Roles August 19, 2009.
SACS and The Accreditation Process Faculty Convocation Southern University Monday, January 12, 2009 Presented By Emma Bradford Perry Dean of Libraries.
Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science Review and Planning Process Fall 1998.
SACS Compliance Certification Orientation Meeting June 23, 2008.
THE VISIT. BASIC PRINCIPLES Peer Evaluation Standards-Based System Relationship to Standards: compliance; substantial compliance; or non compliance.
Commission on Teacher Credentialing Ensuring Educator Excellence 1 Program Assessment Technical Assistance Meetings December 2009.
“Developing an Exemplary Self-Study”.  1. Effective organization and implementation  2. Comprehensive Assessment  3. Documenting Compliance  4. Compilation.
SPC Advisory Committee Training - TAC Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office 1 Abridged from the SPC Advisory Committee Training on October.
SPC Advisory Committee Training Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office SPC 10/9/20151.
Accreditation Overview Winter 2016 Mallory Newell, Accreditation Liaison Office.
THE EVALUATION AND POST EVALUATION Evaluator Training Workshop November 4, 2014.
THE VISIT Year Seven Self-Evaluation. BASIC PRINCIPLES Peer Evaluation Standards-Based System Relationship to Standards: compliance; substantial compliance;
Joint Sponsorship American Association of Neurological Surgeons.
PILOT SCHOOL PRINCIPAL EVALUATION
MSJC Accreditation Classified Professional Day – March 22,2017
Dutchess Community College Middle States Self-Study 2015
The Application Process Understanding the IERs (Institutional Eligibility Requirements ) 2106 TRACS Annual Conference.
Taught Postgraduate Program Review
NATA Foundation Student Grants Process
Orientation Overview April 14, 2017
Implementation of the IPS MDTF
Pre-Investigational New Drug (pre-IND) Meeting with FDA
SACSCOC Fifth-Year Readiness Audit
NATA Foundation General Grants Program Process
Moving forward to Fall 2018 visit
Accreditation 2016 Session 1.
Accreditation Preparation
Reporting the Course level RWR Assessment data
CAEP Orientation: Newcomers
Overview of the FEPAC Accreditation Process
Administrative Review Process
Steering and Compliance Review Team Initial Meeting
Foothill College Accreditation Self-Study Update
General Grants Program Process
Presented by: Corinna Evett
ASSISTANCE DOGS INTERNATIONAL ACCREDITATION PROCEDURES 2018
Middle States Update to President’s Cabinet October 8, 2018
Sam Houston State University
Writing the Institutional Report
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study)
The On-Site Evaluation Visit
IATI – Planned evaluation of IATI
Policies, Procedures, and Best Practices IEEE AESS PANELS 2019 Prepared by the Technical Operations Committee Contents: Applying for Panel Approval Forming.
Region 8 Meeting Harvey Solomon, MD
Curriculum Committee Orientation
Taught Postgraduate Program Review
Fort Valley State University
TEXAS DSHS HIV Care services group
NATA Foundation General Grants Program Process
Accreditation: Working towards the self-study
Institutional Self Evaluation Report Team Training
Presentation transcript:

Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation Dr. Tanmay Pramanik, Vice President – TRACS

Moving from Applicant to Candidate Status Candidacy Process Submission of Self-Study proposal and timeline a. TRACS approval of Self-Study Proposal and timeline. b. TRACS staff visit to the institution to finalize timeline. c. Staff forms the on-site evaluation team. d. Travel Expense Advance for on-site team. e. Change of Status Review Fee to be submitted.

Moving from Applicant to Candidate Status Self-Study Report sent to TRACS (minimum 6 weeks prior to visit) a. Audit received. b. All supporting documentation received. c. TRACS review and approval of Self-Study. 3. Self-Study with documentation sent to team members by the institution.

Moving from Applicant to Candidate Status Team visit (suggested at least 3 months prior to the Commission meeting). Team report a. Draft is submitted to TRACS via staff b. Draft is left with the institution for findings of Errors of Fact c. Report goes through final editing d. Final report along with a matrix is sent to the institution

Moving from Applicant to Candidate Status Billing for team expenses. Institutional response received (no later than 60 days prior to the Commission meeting. Two dates that TRACS receives Institutional Responses – February 15 and August 15 of every year)

Moving from Applicant to Candidate Status Institution scheduled for Commission appearance (April or November) a. Grant candidate status without conditions b. Grant candidate status with conditions c. Defer candidate status to correct serious weaknesses d. Deny candidate status

Steps in the Accreditation Process Self-Study Proposal Organization of the Self-Study Team Timeline, Budget, and other Administrative Tasks Committee Work Self-Study Draft Approval of Self-Study Report by President and Board TRACS Review of the Self-Study TRACS Evaluation Team Visit Candidate Status, Accreditation or Reaffirmation

Self-Study Proposal A Self-Study Proposal must be completed and submitted to the TRACS office for review and approval before initiating the formal self-study process.

Self-Study Proposal Format Introduction and brief history of the institution Purpose of the Self-Study Goals of the Self-Study Self-Study Timeline or Schedule Organization for the Self-Study Role and scope of the committee Names of the committees Membership of the committees Role and scope of the chairs of the committee

Self-Study Proposal Format Materials and Resources Budget for the Self-Study Response to any/all previous Recommendations/Suggestions not completed Copy of the Institutional Plan and Assessment Mechanism as currently implemented

The Organization of the Self-Study Team Self-Study Participants President Self-Study Director Editor Steering Committee Sub-Committees

Timeline, Budget, and other Administrative Tasks Sample Self-Study Timelines Example One: 12-18 Months Oct - January January-June October Initiate the Self-Study at least 12-18 months prior to the desired completion of the Self-Study. Complete the Self-Study and send to TRACS at least six weeks prior to the Team Visit. TRACS team visit must be scheduled no later than June. TRACS Accreditation Commission action.

Agenda Date Steering Committee to meet to agree on the self-study process. Appointment of the Self-Study Director. Appointment of Steering Committee and Sub-Committees First Draft-Committees investigate, interview, analyze, and develop preliminary reports. Steering Committee reviews the first draft and gives feedback to the sub-committees. Second Draft-Committees incorporate input from the Steering Committee and submit Final Self-Study Report. Steering Committee compiles First Draft of Final Self Study Report Editor reviews and edits the First Draft of Final Self-Study Report President receives and reviews copy of the First Draft of Final Self-Study Report Steering Committee compiles Final Self-Study Report. Editor prepares the Final Self-Study Report for publication. President submits Final Self-Study Report to Board for approval President sends copies of Self-Study Report to TRACS & others.

Committee Work Development of the Self-Study Report Two major categories: 1. Foundational Standards 2. Operational Standards Use of Assessment Data

Self-Study Drafts The first draft of the Self-Study Report is compiled by the sub-committees. Upon review of the first draft of the Self-Study Report, the Steering Committee gives feedback to the sub-committees. The second draft of the report incorporates the additional input from the sub-committees and the steering committee. The steering committee will compile the Final Self-Study Report.

Self-Study Drafts Self-Study Report Format Most of the information can be provided in brief, narrative statements supported by charts, tables, and other primary documentation. The Self-Study Report should reflect the current status of the institution and long-term plans. A copy of the current Strategic Plan must be included. Every statement in the Self-Study Report must be documented and supported by analyzed assessment data.

Self-Study Report Format Self-Study Drafts Self-Study Report Format Materials to include with the Self-Study Report Self-Study Report narrative with attachments and documentation Board Manual Policies Manual Catalog Faculty Handbook Student Handbook

Self-Study Report Format Self-Study Drafts Self-Study Report Format Materials to include with the Self-Study Report Job Descriptions Strategic Planning Document Assessment Plan Audit Reports

Approval of Self-Study Report by President and Board The President and Governing Board must review and approve the Self-Study Report prior to submission to the TRACS office. Minutes indicating the approval of the Self-Study Report by the Board need to be included with the documentation.

TRACS Review of the Self-Study Report The final Self-Study Report and all additional materials should be mailed to the TRACS office no later than six weeks prior to the desired team visit. Upon receipt of the documents the TRACS office will review the package of materials for completeness. The final date for the accreditation visit, selection of team members, and travel details will be completed.

TRACS Accreditation Visit Information concerning the details of a TRACS Evaluation Team visit will be sent to the President prior to the visit. The visit brings the beginnings of closure to the Steering Committee. This is the opportunity for each of those who have worked carefully to develop a thorough and comprehensive document to affirm the contents of the report.

Candidate (Pre-accredited) Status, Accreditation or Reaffirmation The Accreditation Commission meets twice a year (in spring and fall) to review the recommendations of the on-site evaluation team and the documents that have been submitted by the institution. The items that the Commission reviews in determining whether an institution should be granted candidate , accredited or reaffirmed status include:

Candidate (Pre-accredited) Status, Accreditation or Reaffirmation The Institution’s Self-Study Report The On-Site Evaluation Team Report The Institution’s Response to the Team Report The Team’s Recommendation to the Commission The Staff Recommendation The Commission Readers’ Recommendation The institutions are required to send at least one representative to the Accreditation Commission meeting when action is being taken on that institution.