Fifth Year Report and Substantive Change Processes

1. Fifth Year Report and Substantive Change Processes Presented by Dr. Belle S. Wheelan, President SACS Commission on Colleges April 29, 2009

2. Why a Fifth-Year Interim Report? DOE requires that accrediting agencies… • Monitor institutions to ensure ongoing compliance (especially when reaffirmation takes place every 10 years) • Have a mechanism to review an institution’s off-campus locations that were initiated since the last reaffirmation if the sites have not already been reviewed.

3. What are the components of the Report? • Part I. Signature of president attesting to the integrity of information (For all institutions) • Part II. An Abbreviated Institutional Summary Form (background info on the institution re: programs, distance learning, off-site programs, etc.) (For all institutions) • Part III. Abbreviated Compliance Certification (Includes 14 standards in the Principles that parallel the DOE criteria for recognition) (For all institutions)

4. What are the components of the Report? • Part IV. Additional Requested Information (a report submitted at the request of the Commission at the time of the institution’s previous review) (For Select Institutions) • Part V. The QEP Impact Report (For all institutions previously reaffirmed under the Principles of Accreditation)

5. Any other Requirements? (Special Institutions) • The Commission will conduct site reviews when either of the following conditions exists: • The establishment of off-campus locations since institution’s last reaffirmation and that have not been visited. • Rapid growth of the institution.

6. What is the review process? • Submission of completed Fifth-Year Interim Report; submission of additional report; submission of the review of off-campus sites For the review of Parts I thru V, except for Part IV: Reviewed by a Committee of experienced off-site review evaluators (not Commissioners) Possible Actions: (1) No monitoring required (2) Refer to the Commission for additional monitoring

7. For the review of Part IV: • Reviewed by a standing committee of the Commission—the Compliance and Reports Committee • Possible Actions: (1) No monitoring required (2) Additional monitoring required not exceeding two years (3) Place the institution on sanction, w/monitoring report; w/out special committee visit

8. For Review on additional off-campus sites • Reviewed by a standing committee of the Commission—the Compliance and Reports Committee • Possible Actions: (1) No monitoring required (2) Additional monitoring required not exceeding two years (3) Place the institution on sanction, w/monitoring report; w/w out special committee visit

9. Which standards are part of the Compliance Certification? • Core Requirement 2.8 – Number of full-time faculty • Core Requirement 2.10 – Student support programs • Comprehensive Standard 3.2.8 – Qualified administrative and academic officers • Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1.1 – Institutional effectiveness (educational programs) • Comprehensive Standard 3.4.3 – Admissions policy • Comprehensive Standard 3.4.11 – Qualified academic coordinators

10. Which standards are part of the Compliance Certification? • Comprehensive Standard 3.11.3 – Physical facilities • Federal Requirement 4.1 – Student achievement • Federal Requirement 4.2 – Program curriculum • Federal Requirement 4.3 – Publication of policies • Federal Requirement 4.4 – Program length • Federal Requirement 4.5 – Student complaints • Federal Requirement 4.6 – Recruitment materials • Federal Requirement 4.7 – Title IV program responsibilities AND Comprehensive Standard 3.10.3 – Financial aid audits

11. Which standards were the most problematic in Dec. 08? • 1. FR 4.5 Student Complaints • Did not document implementation of the complaint policy • 2. CS 3.3.1.1 IE Educational Programs • Did not provide examples of student learning • 3. FR 4.7 Title IV Requirements • Did not provide documentation • 4. CS 3.4.11 Academic programs • Named the coordinator but did not describe qualifications

12. How should institutions prepare? • Continuously update your compliance certification • Provide narrative that supports compliance and explains the use of the documentation chosen  • Provide documentation and examples

13. Substantive Change • Definition: “Substantive change” is a significant modification or expansion of the nature and scope of an accredited institution. • Comprehensive Standard 3.12.1 (approved December, 2006) states: “The institution notifies the Commission of changes in accordance with the substantive change policy and when required seeks approval prior to the initiation of the changes.” The policy on substantive change has been in place a long time; what is new is the inclusion of a separate item in the Comprehensive Standards referring specifically to reporting substantive changes.

14. Substantive Change Federal regulations stipulate that, at minimum, substantive change includes: • Any change in the established mission or objectives of the institution • Any change in legal status, form of control, or ownership of the institution • The addition of courses or programs that represent a significant departure, either in content or method of delivery, from those that were offered when the institution was last evaluated • The addition of courses or programs at a degree or credential level above that which is included in the institution’s current accreditation or reaffirmation.

15. Substantive Change • A change from clock hours to credit hours • A substantial increase in the number of clock or credit hours awarded for successful completion of a program • The establishment of an additional location geographically apart from the main campus at which the institution offers at least 50 percent of an educational program.

16. Why does the Commission care ? It is important for the Commission to understand how your institution is evolving and growing by: • Reviewing proposed changes in terms of the institutional mission • Considering the impact of change on existing programs • Determining whether the institution has sufficient resources to implement the change • Evaluating the soundness of the proposed change

17. Why should institutions care about reporting substantive change? • Maintaining communication with the Commission about your programs helps to create and sustain our partnership in fostering academic quality. • Reporting substantive changes in a timely fashion ensures compliance with federal regulations and with CS 3.12.1 • It is important for your institution to report changes in programs, since federal dollars for student financial aid are tied to approval of substantive changes.

18. Why do we have to report new certificate programs? • Any program that leads to a credential (certificate, diploma, degree) is part of the institution’s accreditation. If the certificate is in an area where the institution does not currently have a program or is significantly different from existing programs, it must be reported. If the courses for the certificate are taken from the approved curriculum, you do not need to notify the Commission.

19. What is a “significant departure” from existing programs? Does the new program require: • Additional faculty? • New courses? • Additional library or other learning resources? • New equipment or facilities? • New funding?

20. Some obvious examples of a significant departure: • Initiating coursework or programs at a more advanced level than currently approved • Initiating programs at a lower level than currently approved • Initiating a branch campus All of these require advance notification and approval of a prospectus or an application for level change.

21. Contact Information Dr. Belle S. Wheelan, President SACSCOC bwheelan@sacscoc.org 404.679.4512