Accjc gone wild


Application Process for Accreditation Agencies to Receive Reaccreditation



Download 2.61 Mb.
Page7/121
Date13.06.2017
Size2.61 Mb.
#20740
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   ...   121

Application Process for Accreditation Agencies to Receive Reaccreditation



The Accrediting Agency Evaluation Unit
The Accrediting Agency Evaluation Unit has been established within the Department of Education to deal with accreditation matters. Located in the Office of Postsecondary Education, the Unit carries out the following major functions with respect to accreditation:


  1. Conduct a continuous review of standards, policies, procedures, and issues in the area of the Department of Education's interests and responsibilities relative to accreditation;

  2. Administer the process whereby accrediting agencies and State approval agencies secure initial and renewed recognition by the Secretary of Education;

  3. Serving as the Department's liaison with accrediting agencies and State approval agencies;

  4. Providing consultative services to institutions, associations, state agencies, other federal agencies, and Congress regarding accreditation;

  5. Interpreting and disseminating policy relative to accreditation issues in the case of all appropriate programs administered by the Department of Education;

  6. Conducting and stimulating appropriate research; and

  7. Providing support for the Secretary's National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity.

An agency's application for renewal of recognition consists of a narrative statement, organized on a criterion-by-criterion basis, showing how the agency complies with the Criteria for Recognition. For many recognition requirements, the narrative statement need only consist of a brief narrative demonstrating how that agency complies with a particular requirement. This statement must, however, be accompanied by clearly referenced supporting documentation demonstrating that the agency meets the requirement. For example, §602.15(a)(6) of the regulations requires an agency to have clear and effective controls against conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts of interest by the agency's board members, commissioners, evaluation team members, consultants, administrative staff, and other agency representatives. The agency's narrative statement addressing this issue might simply be a statement that the agency's policies against conflicts of interest may be found in a particular policy document. The agency would have to submit a copy of that document and identify the pages on which the relevant policies were located. The agency might also choose to include a copy of the minutes of a meeting at which an agency representative abstained from voting because of a conflict of interest to demonstrate that it adheres to its written policies.


If an agency's application for recognition does not make specific reference to the following documents and does not include them as supporting documentation for one or more of the recognition requirements, the agency must include them as additional supporting documentation:


  1. Accreditation standards and procedures

  2. Policies and procedures

  3. Most recent externally audited financial statement

  4. Published lists of accredited schools or programs

  5. Self-study guidelines

  6. Guidance and training materials for visiting team members

  7. Sample completed self-study reports

  8. Sample site visit reports

  9. Sample institution responses to site visit reports

  10. Sample minutes of decision meetings

  11. A list of all complaints received by the agency against an accredited program during the six-month period immediately preceding the agency's submission of its application for recognition, together with a summary of the issues involved in each complaint, the agency's disposition of that complaint, and the current status of the complaint, if it is not resolved by the time the agency submits its application

  12. The agency's constitution and by-laws.


Application for Continued Recognition
Agencies that have been granted recognition by the Secretary are officially notified of the expiration date of their recognition period in a letter each time recognition is granted or renewed. They should plan to submit their application for renewal of recognition approximately six months in advance of the spring or fall meeting of the NACIQI that precedes that expiration date. The Accrediting Agency Evaluation Unit usually notifies agencies a year in advance of the NACIQI meeting at which their renewal application is to be considered and informs them of the date by which their application is due. The notice also requests a schedule of each agency's site visits and decision meetings for the upcoming year in order to plan staff observation of at least some of those activities, as required by §602.32(b)(1) of the regulations.

Staff Analysis of an Accrediting Agency's Application

The application review process conducted by the Department includes analysis of the application and observation of some of the agency's site visit and decision-making activities by Accrediting Agency Evaluation Unit staff. Staff members may also visit agency administrative offices to conduct interviews of agency staff and to review the agency's facilities, records and administrative operations. They may also conduct interviews or surveys of other persons, organizations, or institutions concerning the applicant agency's approval process in order to obtain further information relating to the agency's compliance with the Criteria and Procedures for Recognition. Department staff then prepares a written analysis of the agency's application for recognition, which includes a recommendation on recognition.



Hearing Before the Advisory Committee

When staff completes its evaluation of an agency's application for recognition, the agency's application is placed on the meeting agenda of the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity; (NACIQI). In preparation for the meeting, the committee is provided with the accrediting agency's application and supporting documentation; the final staff analysis of the application; the staff's recommendation on recognition; all information relied upon by staff in developing the analysis; at the agency's request, any response by the agency to the draft staff analysis; and any written third-party comments the Department received about the agency and agency response.


The NACIQI meets at least twice a year to review applications for recognition submitted by accrediting agencies. The usual times for the Committee meetings are spring (May-June) and fall (November-December). Although each member of the Committee receives every staff analysis of an application for recognition and all the other materials mentioned in the preceding paragraph, the Executive Director of the NACIQI usually assigns two or more individuals to serve as principal readers for each application.
An agency that applies for recognition is invited to make an oral presentation before the Committee. The Committee also hears oral presentations from third parties who request to be heard. Department staff are available throughout NACIQI meetings to respond to questions.
The NACIQI conducts its business in public, and a transcript of the proceedings is made. After each meeting, the Committee's and Department staff's recommendations concerning recognition are forwarded to the Senior Department Official, who makes the final determination regarding recognition. Any agency that disagrees with the decision of the Senior Department Official may appeal to the Secretary. Agencies may be granted initial recognition or renewal of recognition for a period of up to five years.
The hearing on the accreditation of ACCJC by the NACIQI will be held on December 12-13, 2013. The final staff report from the Department of Education will be available no later than 7 days prior to December 12, 2013. It will be posted in the public document section of https://opeweb.ed.gov/aslweb/.
I have included the list of current members of the NACIQI that will judge ACCJC. You can make up your own mind as to whether this group will give ACCJC an objective or biased evaluation.



Download 2.61 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   ...   121




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page