1. Steps in the Accreditation Cycle A Collaboration Effort: The United Negro College Fund and The Commission on Colleges Steps in the Accreditation Cycle A Collaboration Effort: The United Negro College Fund and The Commission on Colleges Presented by: Rudolph S. Jackson, UNCF Lead Consultant for FASTAP February 14, 2014 1

2. Objectives for today’s Session  Understand the orientation differences between UNCF and SACSCOC  Appreciate some of the fundamental components necessary for a successful SACSCOC review  Appreciate the rationale for a Fifth-Year Interim Review  Develop strategies for avoiding missteps in compliance reporting 2 Participants will:

3. Peer Review Capacity Building SACSCOC UNCF Strategic Focus 3 StudentLearning

4. Resources Procedures and Activities An Emphasis on Compliance (Accreditation Reviews) Traditional Emphasis on Compliance and unit-level effectiveness -Institutional Mission - Financial support -Expertise and technical know-how -Personnel and student services -Governance -O perating and policy procedures -Organization and reporting structures 4

5. Resources Procedures and Activities Outcomes Tracing a Shift to Outcomes Review Traditional Emphasis on Compliance and unit-level effectiveness Emerging Refinements in Regional Accreditation -Institutional Mission - Financial support -Expertise technical know-how -Personnel and student services -Governance -O perating/policy procedures -Organization and reporting structures Student Learning -Knowledge -Skills -Behavioral Patterns 5

6. FASTAP Initiative (Financial and Strategic Technical Assistance Program)  Addressing Accreditation Issues  Establishing Institutional Priorities  Developing Workable Strategies for improvements 6

7. Getting Started (Planning Fundamentals)  Understand the reaffirmation process  Document the Compliance Certification  Explore the COC Website involving updates/policies www.sacscoc.org www.sacscoc.org  Review the Resource Manual prepared by COC 7

8. Getting Started Cont’d  Attend planned COC Sessions (e.g. annual meeting/orientation)  Review and discuss peer institutional experiences  Explore observer opportunities on visiting committees on visiting committees 8

9. Understanding The Reaffirmation Process Orientation (>2 yrs before reaffirmation) Advisory visit (optional) Compliance Certification (Off-site Review) Focused Report Reaffirmation Committee (On-site Review) Response Report (for COC Review) Fifth-Year/Interim Report 9

10.  Organize for success  Establish timetables and reporting schedules  Share the vision for completing the certification document  Determine visual formats  Maintain close ties with tech staff Fielding The Right Team 10

11. -ISSUE AREAS- FacultyFaculty CurriculumCurriculum Administration and GovernanceAdministration and Governance Technical/PresentationTechnical/Presentation FinanceFinance OtherOther Compliance Compliance Coordinator with direct access to CEO Coordinator with direct access to CEO Leadership Team InstitutionalResources and Information 11

12. Why a Fifth-Year Interim Review Process?  Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA) –Reg 602.19(b) Speaks to accrediting agencies monitoring their accredited institutions to ensure ongoing compliance. –Reg 602.22(c)(2) Calls for accrediting agencies having an effective mechanism for conducting, at reasonable intervals, visits to additional locations of institutions that operate more than three additional locations. –There are variances in review cycles among accrediting bodies. 12

13. 5 Most Cited Standards for the Fifth- Year Over the Past 4 Years 1.CS 3.3.1.1 Institutional Effectiveness: Educational Programs, to include Student Learning Outcomes— 49% 2.CR 2.8 Number of Full-time Faculty—41% 3.CS 3.4.11 Qualified Academic Coordinators—31% 4.FR 4.5 Student Complaints—26% 5. CS 3.13.3 Complaint Record—24% 13

14. COMMON PITFALLS/ERRORS  Narrative/No Evidence  Incomplete Responses (Failure to make a case) (Failure to make a case)  Policy Expectations – Verification – See Resource Manual 14

15. FR 4.5 Student Complaints  Provide a copy of student complaint policies  Provide real examples (student names and ID removed) that document and illustrate how complaints are resolved  Provide a record of Student complaints (a complaint log) [Addressed as part of CS 3.13]  Address how complaints are handled from students enrolled at off-campus sites and via distance education 15

16.  Common Issues: –Lack of defined student learning outcomes and/or methods for assessing the outcomes –Limited/Immature data –Not documenting use of data to make improvements –Not addressing distance education and off-campus site programs. CS 3.3.1.1 Institutional Effectiveness: Educational Programs 16

17. CS 3.3.1.1 Cycle 17 Expected Outcomes Assessment: Results & Evaluation Use of Results For Improvement

18.   Reporting Substantive change   Importance of QEP Abstract   Reporting Adequacy of Full-Time Faculty   Illustrating Policy Compliance [2 meanings]   Defining Credit Hour for your institution   Reporting Distance Education   Addressing Institutional Effectiveness Area to Drill and Understand- Discuss with SACSCOC Staff 18

19.   Determine adherence to planned schedule   Compile, edit, and track incoming drafts (attention to updates)   Revisit standards with multiple and special policy components   Determine need for Staff Advisory visit and agenda items 12 - Month System Check-Up 19

20. Pre-Submission Drill - Maintain Focus and Watch the Clock   Provide clear narrative that demonstrates compliance, along with supporting evidence   Check computer links   Include prep time for unanticipated details   Seek external review and validation of reference documents 20

21. Questions and Observations 21