SACS Reaffirmation Project Compliance Certification Team Orientation Overview Thursday, September 30, 20109 – 11:00AM 209 Main Building – Lexmark Public.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Writing the Team Report Chairs and Evaluators Workshop.
Advertisements

Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation
Presented by Dr. Tanmay Pramanik Overview of On-Site Team Evaluation.
EVALUATOR ORIENTATION Serving on Off-Site and On-Site Committees OVERVIEW.
(Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act) and
Instructor Teaching Impact. University Writing Program 150 sections of required writing courses per semester, taught by Instructors and GTAs 33 Instructors–
WHAT THE BUSINESS OFFICER NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT SACS Presented by Gene Gooch McLennan Community College TACCBO June 2012 The information presented is authorized.
 2009– LA Delta Initially Accredited by SACS  July 2010 – Tallulah & Lake Providence Consolidated with LA Delta  July 2012 – LA Delta & NELTC Legislatively.
PREPARING FOR SACS Neal E. Armstrong Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs July 13, 2004.
Faculty WASC Information Session January 18, 2011.
David S. Adegboye, Ph.D. Professor of Biology Associate Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs & Accreditation Liaison Officer Presented at the “Workshop.
Longwood University QEP QEP stands for Quality Enhancement Plan.
Special Education Accountability Reviews Let’s put the pieces together March 25, 2015.
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.
Verification Visit by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) September 27-29, 2010.
Commission on Accreditation for Respiratory Care The Site Visitors Are Coming! Transitioning from Successful Self- Study to Successful Site Visit Bradley.
CORE TEAM / FUNCTIONAL TEAM KICKOFF PHASE 2 St. Philip’s College Core Team February 4, 2014 The Bowden Alumni Center.
DEVELOPMENT OF COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION REPORT: Lessons Learned Alexei G. Matveev, Ph.D. NORFOLK STATE UNIVERSITY Southern University at New Orleans //
St. Petersburg College: Fifth Year Interim Report Dr. Julia Pet-Armacost Dr. Robert L. Armacost SACSCOC Steering Team March 1, 2013.
Middle States Accreditation at UB Jason N. Adsit Director, Teaching and Learning Center Michael E. Ryan Director, University Accreditation and Assessment.
SACS Reaffirmation Project Compliance Certification Team Leaders Meeting Friday, August 27, – 11:00AM 107 Main Building Jennifer Skaggs, Ph.D. SACS.
SACS Reaffirmation Robert B. Bradley October 2013 THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY 1.
PROGRESS REPORT SACS-COC ACCREDITATION REAFFIRMATION VISIT David S. Adegboye, Ph.D. Interim Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs/Accreditation Liaison.
Steps in the Accreditation Cycle A Collaboration Effort: The United Negro College Fund and The Commission on Colleges Steps in the Accreditation Cycle.
SACS Reaffirmation Project Compliance Certification Team Orientation Compliance Certification Report Thursday, September 30, – 11:00AM 209 Main Building.
Keeping Up-to-Date with SACSCOC MAC Meeting Fall 2013.
Procedures and Forms 2008 FRCC Compliance Workshop April 8-9, 2008.
Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
Dr. Constance Ray Vice President, Institutional Research, Planning, & Effectiveness.
SACS-COC Reaffirmation of Accreditation Overview Plus Q & A CCPRO Conference, Greensboro, NC September 2011 Kimberly B. Lawing, Vice President of Institutional.
Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) 101 Del Mar College January 8, 2007 Loraine Phillips, Ph.D. Interim Assessment Director Texas A&M University.
What’s New in SACS Reaffirmation Ephraim Schechter September 23, 2004 Western Carolina University.
 SACSCOC REAFFIRMATION FALL  OBJECTIVES: 1.List key facts related to the SACSCOC reaffirmation process. 2.Verbalize understanding of SACSCOC Principles.
April 8, Agenda Charge of the Group SACS/QEP Update/Overview 5 th Year Interim Report Assigned Areas Next Steps.
Fifth Year Report and Substantive Change Processes Presented by Dr. Belle S. Wheelan, President SACS Commission on Colleges April 29, 2009.
SACS and The Accreditation Process Faculty Convocation Southern University Monday, January 12, 2009 Presented By Emma Bradford Perry Dean of Libraries.
Changes in the Faculty Review Process for United Academics Faculty Presenter: Patricia Linton, College of Arts & Sciences.
SACS Reaffirmation of Accreditation 7/28/09 Academic Affairs Retreat Cathy Sanders Director of Assessment.
SACS Compliance Certification Orientation Meeting June 23, 2008.
UWF SACS REAFFIRMATION OF ACCREDITATION PROJECT Presentation to UWF Board of Trustees November 7, 2003.
SACS Review and WCU Training and Orientation Thursday, February 24, 2005 Carol Burton, Director, SACS Review.
SACS Leadership Retreat 9/23/ Western Carolina University SACS Reaffirmation of Accreditation Frank Prochaska Executive Director, UNC Teaching.
Long-Range Planning Presentation to the Del Mar College Board Committee May 13, 2008.
The Quality Enhancement Plan from a SACSCOC Perspective 1 Leadership Orientation for 2016-A Institutions January 27, 2014 Michael S. Johnson Senior Vice.
The Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP). SACS Principles of Accreditation Integrity Quality Enhancement.
Preparing for SACS Reaffirmation The SACS Principles of Accreditation and impact on Georgia Tech.
Accreditation Update and Institutional Student Learning Outcomes Deborah Moeckel, SUNY Assistant Provost SCoA Drive in Workshops Fall 2015
Part 1: Overview and Initial Steps. Compliance Certification (Report) Quality Enhancement (Plan) REAFFIRMATION.
Timetable and preparation. Why Accreditation is Important? Recognition of credits by other institutions Recognition of degrees Federal funding Recruitment.
Gordon State College Office of Institutional Effectiveness Faculty Meeting August 5, 2015.
Higher Learning Commission Accreditation Process Update.
Moving Successfully Toward SACS Reaffirmation: An Introductory Discussion Presenters Dr. Cathy Fleuriet Associate Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness.
Revised 2/19/07 Institutional Review Milestones FIU Reaffirmation of Accreditation by SACS (Leadership Orientation June 2008) Quality Enhancement Plan.
“Are We Missing the Mark?” WELCOME Bill Lefevers Western Piedmont Community College.
Cleveland State University Self Study 2010 North Central Association/Higher Learning Commission Accreditation.
October 14, 2014 Reaffirmation of UofL.
This is not your grandfather’s re-accreditation process. January 7, 2009.
Overview of SACS-COC Reaffirmation Process Prepared for Reaffirmation Steering Committee April 10, 2006.
March 23, SPECIAL EDUCATION ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEWS.
4/16/07 SACS Reaffirmation Process Susan P. Himburg SACS Director of Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
Here Today Here to Stay August 17, TJC’s Mission.
The New SACS All the Questions You Wanted to Ask about Accreditation, and Even Some You Didn’t…
Dutchess Community College Middle States Self-Study 2015
SACSCOC Fifth-Year Readiness Audit
Call to Conversation: SACS Reaffirmation
Accreditation Pathway
Reaccreditation and Illinois
Coastal Bend College’s Quality Enhancement Plan
Road to SACSCOC Reaffirmation
Presentation transcript:

SACS Reaffirmation Project Compliance Certification Team Orientation Overview Thursday, September 30, – 11:00AM 209 Main Building – Lexmark Public Room Jennifer Skaggs, Ph.D. SACS Reaffirmation Project Director University of Kentucky

Major Components in the SACS Reaffirmation Process 1. Preparation of Compliance Certification Report 2. Off-site Review & Report 3. Focused Report for On-site visit (if prepared) 4. On-site Visit 5. Response to the On-Site Visit Report 6. Commission Action 2CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

Changes in SACS Reaccreditation Process Previous reaccreditation in 2002 involved: ◦ Institutional Self Study ◦ Over 400 “must” and “should” statements New Process (effective 2004) ◦ 17 Core Requirements ◦ 59 Comprehensive Standards ◦ 7 Federal requirements ◦ QEP Plan (biggest change) 3CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

What this means Onus is on institution to “make its case” with regard to compliance Emphasis in Principles of Accreditation is placed on more subjective analysis of best practices Determination of compliance is frequently more subjective with the Principles of Accreditation. 4CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

Consequences of Non-Compliance Findings If an institution is found out of compliance with any of the Core Requirements (CR)  Immediate public sanction of non-compliance  Reaffirmation will be denied until deficiencies are corrected If an institution is found out of compliance with any Comprehensive Standard (CS) or Federal Requirement (FR)  The institution submits a formal response regarding those issues and the steps being taken to become compliant (Focused Report) CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/105

Consequences of Non-Compliance Findings (continued) In all cases of non-compliance MMonitoring will be made to SACS until compliance is demonstrated within a two-year monitoring period at which time sanctions will be imposed if compliance or significant progress towards compliance has not been made. Loss of accreditation leads to loss of federal funding for student aid CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/106

Examples of Non-Compliance Findings (Class of 2008) Off-site ◦ 88% had non-compliance with faculty competence (CS 3.7.1) ◦ 69% had non-compliance with institutional effectiveness (CR 2.5) On-Site ◦ 43% had non-compliance with faculty competence (CS 3.7.1) ◦ 56% had non-compliance with institutional effectiveness (CR 2.5) Commission Stage ◦ 36% had monitoring requirement for institutional effectiveness (CR 2.5) ◦ 26% had monitoring requirement for college-level competencies (CS 3.5.1) 7CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

Recurring Reasons for Compliance Decisions by Off-Site Committees 1. Sufficiency of documentation 2. Analysis 3. Quality of writing 4. Accessibility of documentation 5. Relevance of documentation 6. Organization of report 7. Report addressed the requirement 8. Verification needed 9. Implementation (Carter, Johnson, & Gibbs, 2007) 8CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

Compliance Certification Report The Compliance Certification Report involves: ◦ Narratives ◦ Documentation It is a document completed by the institution that demonstrates its judgment of the extent of its compliance with each of the Core Requirements (CR), Comprehensive Standards (CS), and Federal Requirements (FR). This report is submitted to the Off-Site Reaffirmation Committee CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/109

Off-Site Review Peer reviewers & SACS staff members have limited knowledge of the institutional context Have limited time to search for information to fill in what was left out Will not be able to seek clarification Be vigilant regarding giving too much non- relevant institutional information 10CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

In other words… The Compliance Certification Report must be able to speak for itself and must explicitly address all components of the requirements and standards Narrative must be crisp and clear Appropriate and relevant documentation must be easily accessible for each standard/requirement. 11CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

Questions to be asked by Compliance Certification Teams What are the focal points of your assigned requirements/standards? What might be the concerns of off- and on-site reviewers regarding your assigned requirements/standards? What UK policies and/or official procedures apply to these requirements/standards? What is the common practice at UK concerning these requirements/standards? Have recent reviews been conducted concerning these requirements/standards? Are there other policies and procedures needed to document compliance with this topic? Is there other evidence such as records, survey results, reports, etc. needed to document compliance with this topic? 12CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

Where to start Begin analysis by careful interpretation of the standards and requirements to understand each aspect and what information and data must be assembled to document compliance Consult the SACS Resource Manual Take sufficient time to deconstruct each standard and requirement and interpret them in the context of UK Plan for document control 13CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

Planning for Document Version Control For teams larger than two members, one person must be assigned lead responsibility (point person) for each core requirement and comprehensive standard Critical to keep track of which version is the most current SharePoint Site should be used to maintain one official version 14CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

Desired Results: Well-structured narrative designs  CRISP & CLEAR Appropriate documentation  No Data Dumps  Be sure documentation is applicable, appropriate, and easy to access 15CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

Timeline for Compliance Certification Report Draft of Compliance Certification Report due by September 2011 Draft allows for  Self-review and “buys time” to make necessary corrections  Finding evidence weaknesses  Preparation of Compliance Certification narratives to be “one voice”  Effective use and development of electronic resources Final Compliance Certification Report turned into SACS September CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

CC Team Member Folders Teams Team Assignments (Responsibility Matrix) Timeline Internal Timeline/Checklist Principles of Accreditation Example of SACS Compliance Notice (SCN) 17CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10

UK SACS Website 18CC Team Orientation Overview 9/30/10