Presented by: Rudolph S. Jackson, UNCF Lead Consultant for FASTAP

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

2. Objectives for today’s Session Participants will: • 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

3. Strategic Focus Student Learning Peer Review UNCF SACSCOC Capacity Building

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

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

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

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

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

9. UnderstandingThe 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

10. Fielding The Right Team • 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

11. Leadership Team -ISSUE AREAS- • Faculty • Curriculum • Administration and Governance • Technical/Presentation • Finance • Other Compliance Coordinator with direct access to CEO Institutional Resources and Information

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.

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

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

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

16. CS 3.3.1.1 Institutional Effectiveness: Educational Programs • 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.

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

18. Area to Drill and Understand- Discuss with SACSCOC Staff • 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

19. 12 - Month System Check-Up • 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

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

21. Questions and Observations