The Higher Learning Commission

Transcription

1 A Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools 230 S. LaSalle Street, Suite Chicago, IL ncahlc.org FEDERAL COMPLIANCE PROGRAM Effective for visits beginning January 1, 2011 Introduction As a federally recognized accrediting agency, the Higher Learning Commission is required to assure that all its member institutions comply with federal regulations. Compliance with that requirement is necessary to ensure that institutions accredited by the Higher Learning Commission are eligible for federal financial aid. The following guide outlines the current Federal Compliance requirements for accredited institutions and peer reviewers. The Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 increased the number of statutory requirements that the Commission must ensure its accredited institutions fulfill. Further, the Department of Education continues to define and to implement these requirements through regulations effective July 1, 2010, and additional regulations effective July 1, This document was substantially revised in 2009 to reflect the changes in statute and anticipated changes in regulation. The revised document for visits in spring 2011 reflects any changes in regulations and in Commission policy not reflected in the document. Finally, the Commission anticipates that it will need to revise its policies on credits and program length in 2011 to meet new federal regulations for accrediting agencies recently published in late Expectations for Institutions and Peer Reviewers The Higher Learning Commission s Federal Compliance program follows a three-step process. First, institutions must address these guidelines in the materials they submit to the Commission before a visit. Institutions applying for initial candidacy, continued candidacy, or initial accreditation, and institutions maintaining accreditation through the Commission s Program to Evaluate and Advance Quality (PEAQ) should address the Federal Compliance requirements in the self-study before the comprehensive evaluation visit. Institutions maintaining accreditation through the Commission s Academic Quality Improvement Program (AQIP) should address the requirements in the materials prepared for a Quality Checkup Visit. Peer reviewers should study the requirements and submitted materials before the visit to determine whether there are any areas of concern. Second, with either program, the Commission expects that institutions make Federal Compliance information available in the Resource Room during the visit. While conducting the visit, peer reviewers should verify that the Federal Compliance information they received is accurate and complete. They should raise any questions they have with institutional representatives. Third, peer reviewers should document that they have conducted a thorough review of the institution s compliance with federal guidelines. A template in the team report guides this documentation. CREDITS, PROGRAM LENGTH, AND TUITION Applicable Commission Policies: 3.10, CREDITS, PROGRAM LENGTH AND TUITION; 3.2(d)1, CHANGES IN MISSION OR INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS What is the expectation of this requirement? The institution should be able to demonstrate that it assigns credit hours to courses in a reasonable and systematic way, typically in the semester hour or quarter hour

2 format. Degree programs should have overall credit hour requirements. These credit hour assignments and degree program requirements should fit within the range of current good practice in higher education in the United States. Should the institution seek to make any significant change to credit hour assignments or degree program requirements, the institution must seek Commission approval. Additionally, institutions should set tuition consistently across degree programs. If tuition differs for a particular program or programs, the institution should be able to justify that difference based on costs for offering that degree, the length of the program, or the objectives of the program. the information the institution submits before a visit, particularly the course catalog and any specialized accrediting agency actions. The team should determine whether the institution s credit hour allocations, degree program requirements, and tuition costs across programs are within the range of good practice in higher education and contribute to an academic environment in which students receive a rigorous and thorough education. Keep in mind that the Commission has specific credit hour requirements for degree programs as outlined in the Minimum Expectations for institutions; teams should refer to that document for more information about the expectations and handling any deviation from those expectations. STUDENT COMPLAINTS Applicable Commission Policies: 13.3, INSTITUTIONAL RECORDS OF STUDENT COMPLAINTS What is the expectation of this requirement? The institution should explain its process for handling student complaints. The institution should also summarize the number and type of complaints and track their resolutions for the three years prior to the visit. The institution is free to design the process that best fits its needs and may even determine that a student complaints policy is not necessary. Whatever approach the institution takes, the institution should show that it receives, tracks, and processes student complaints in a timely manner. The institution should also report on this information in the aggregate to the visiting team. the process that the institution uses to manage complaints as well as the history of complaints received and processed. The team should use this information to determine whether the institution has a process to review and resolve complaints in a timely manner. The team should verify that the evidence shows that the institution can, and does, follow this process and should advise the institution of any improvements that might be appropriate. This requirement links to the institution s fulfillment of Criterion One regarding mission and integrity. TRANSFER POLICIES Applicable Commission Policies: 3.11, TRANSFER OF CREDIT What is the expectation of this requirement? The institution should demonstrate that it discloses its transfer policies to students and to the public. Its policies should contain information about the criteria the institution uses to make transfer of credit decisions. the institution s transfer policies. In particular, the team should consider where the institution discloses these policies (in its catalog, on its Web site, etc.) and how easily current and prospective students can access that information. The team should determine whether the disclosed information clearly explains the criteria the institution uses to make transfer decisions. Page 2

3 VERIFICATION OF STUDENT IDENTITY Updated in ! Applicable Commission Policies: 3.12, VERIFICATION OF THE IDENTITY OF STUDENTS IN DISTANCE OR CORRESPONDENCE EDUCATION What is the expectation of this requirement? The institution should verify the identity of students who participate in courses or programs provided through distance or correspondence education. The institution may use a variety of approaches to verifying student identity, which may include (1) secure login and pass code; (2) proctored examinations; and (3) new or other technologies and practices that are effective in verifying the identity of students. Additionally, if the method by which the institution verifies student identity will incur a cost to the student (such as a fee for a proctored exam) the institution must disclose that cost to the student at the time of registration or enrollment. The institution must also demonstrate that it is making reasonable efforts to protect student privacy in verifying student identity. Note that the definitions of distance and correspondence education for the purpose of verifying student identify are the federal definitions and are quoted in the Commission policy for reference. How should the team determine that the institution has met this requirement? The team should determine how the institution verifies that the student who enrolls in a course is the same student who submits assignments, takes exams, and earns a final grade. The team should ensure that the institution does not merely have plans to verify student identity but has implemented actual approaches and that those approaches respect student privacy. TITLE IV PROGRAM and RELATED RESPONSIBILITIES Updated in ! Applicable Commission Policies: 1.6, INSTITUTIONAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE HIGHER EDUCATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT; 3.2(d)1, CHANGES IN INSTITUTIONAL MISSION OR CHARACTERISTICS What is the expectation of this requirement? Institutions are expected to provide the Commission with information regarding each of the following components. The institution staff compiling this information should work with the financial aid office and the Chief Financial Officer or comptroller. This requirement has several components the institution and team must address: 1. General Program Responsibilities. The institution should provide the Commission with information regarding the status of its Title IV program; in particular, the institution should submit information about recent findings from Title IV program reviews, inspections, or audits. The institution should disclose any limitation, suspension, or termination actions that the Department of Education may have undertaken and the reasons for those actions. The institution should also disclose any fines, letters of credit, or heightened monitoring arising from the Department of Education. The institution should address, in the self-study, the consequences of these requirements on its financial health. The institution should also discuss its response and corrective actions to these challenges. 2. Financial Responsibility Requirements. The institution must provide information about the Department s review of the institution s composite ratios and financial audits. In particular, the institution should provide information about the A-133 portion of the audit. The Commission also analyzes each institution s financial ratios to determine whether there might be financial concerns. The team should check to see whether either the Commission or the Department has raised concerns about the institution s finances based on these ratios. If so, the institution should discuss the actions it has taken in response to these concerns. 3. Default Rates. The institution should take steps to avoid excessive loan default rates. The institution should disclose student loan default rates for the three years leading up to the visit. The institution should use either the Department s calculation of these rates or the Department s instructions for calculating rates. Page 3

4 If the default rates are higher for the institution than its peers or if rates have triggered a Department review, then the institution should address the actions it has taken in response and submit to the team any corrective plan filed with the department. Note for 2011: institutions and teams should use the three-year default rate; if the institution does not provide the default rate for three years leading up to the comprehensive evaluation visit, the team should contact Commission staff. 4. Campus Crime Information and Related Disclosure of Consumer Information. Title IV program responsibilities include legal responsibilities to disclose information to students and to the public. The institution should provide the Commission samples of those disclosures. In addition, the institution should discuss any findings from the Department regarding these disclosures. 5. Satisfactory Academic Progress and Attendance Policies. Institutions are required to have a Satisfactory Academic Progress policy and an attendance policy as part of the Title IV program. They must document to the Commission that this policy is readily available to students and satisfies state or federal requirements. In most cases, teams should verify that these policies exist and are available to students, typically in the course catalog or student handbook. Note that the Commission does not necessarily require that institutions take attendance but does anticipate that institutional attendance policies will provide information to students about attendance requirements at the institution. 6. Contractual Relationships. The institution should disclose its contracts with third-party entities not accredited by a federally recognized accrediting agency as a part of the materials for the on-site evaluation. The institution should have previously disclosed all existing contracts to the Commission during the 2010 Annual Institutional Data Update (AIDU). The Commission s substantive change policy requires that that institution notify the Commission of any new contracts for up to 25 percent of an academic program, that the institution obtain prior Commission approval before initiating any contract for 25 to 50 percent of a program, and that the Commission will approve contracts for more than 50 percent of a program only in exceptional circumstances under heavy scrutiny. 7. Consortial Relationships. The institution should disclose its consortial relationships with other entities accredited by a federally recognized accrediting agency as part of the materials for the on-site evaluation. Institutions should have previously disclosed all consortial relationships to the Commission during the 2010 AIDU. The Commission s substantive change policy requires that the institution notify the Commission of any new consortium for up to 50 percent of an academic program and that the institution obtain prior Commission approval for any consortium that offers 50 percent or more of an academic program. all of the information that the institution discloses having to do with its Title IV program responsibilities. the team should determine whether the Department has raised any issues related to the institution s compliance and decide whether these issues relate to the institution s ability to satisfy the Criteria for Accreditation. INSTITUTIONAL DISCLOSURES and ADVERTISING AND RECRUITMENT MATERIALS Updated in ! Applicable Commission Policies: 12.2, AN AFFILIATED ORGANIZATION S OBLIGATIONS FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE; 12.6, AN ORGANIZATION S ADVERTISING AND RECRUITING MATERIALS What is the expectation of this requirement? The institutions= should demonstrate that it provides accurate, timely, and appropriately detailed information to current and prospective students and the public about its accreditation status with the Commission and with other accrediting agencies. The institution should also provide such information to students about its programs, locations, and policies. Page 4

5 the institution s disclosure about its accreditation status with the Commission to determine whether the information it provides is appropriately formatted and contains the Commission s Web site address. The institutions should use the Commission s Mark of Affiliation wherever possible because it provides all required disclosure information about accreditation. The team should review disclosures about other accrediting agencies for accuracy and for appropriate consumer information, particularly regarding the link between specialized/professional accreditation and the licensure necessary for employment in many professional or specialized areas. The team should also review the institution s catalog, brochures, recruiting materials, and information provided by advisors or counselors to determine whether the institution provides accurate information to students. RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER ACCREDITING AGENCIES AND WITH STATE REGULATORY BODIES Updated in ! Applicable Commission Policies: 9.1 PROFESSIONAL OR SPECIALIZED ACCREDITATION; 9.2(a) REGARD FOR ACCREDITATION ACTIONS BY OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITING AGENCIES; 9.3 REQUIREMENTS OF INSTITUTIONS HOLDING DUAL INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION; 9.4 CONSIDERATION OF OTHER AGENCIES DECISIONS;10.2 RELATIONS WITH STATES, COORDINATING BOARDS, AND HIGHER BOARDS What is the expectation of this requirement? These policies requires that the institution appropriately disclose to the Commission its relationship with any other specialized, professional, or institutional accreditor and with all governing or coordinating bodies in states in which the institution may have a presence. The institution must disclose this information in appropriate portions of the AIDU as well as in its Self-Study or Quality Checkup Report. The institution must also make available for the team the most recent comprehensive evaluation report and action letter from each institutional or specialized accrediting agency as well as any interim monitoring prepared for that agency. the information, particularly any information that indicates the institution is under sanction or show-cause or has had its status with any agency suspended, revoked, or terminated as well as the reasons for such actions. The team should then determine whether this information provides any indication about the institution s capacity to meet the Commission s Criteria for Accreditation. Should the team recommend initial or continued status to an institution that is under sanction or adverse action (i.e., withdrawal, suspension, denial, or termination) with another institutional accreditor or state entity IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS?, the team must outline in the report its reasons for making its recommendation despite its knowledge of these actions. Should the team learn that the institution is at risk of losing, or has lost, its degree authorization in any state in which it meets state presence requirements, it should contact the Commission staff liaison as soon as possible. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION VISIT and THIRD PARTY COMMENT Applicable Commission Policies: 12.8, PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION VISIT What is the expectation of this requirement? The Commission seeks public comments on institutions as part of its comprehensive evaluations and Quality Checkup Visits. To decide how best to solicit third party comments, the institution should first determine its constituencies. These groups should include students, parents, alumni, taxpayers, donors, community groups, local businesses, and so on. The institution should then decide what media it will use to solicit comments. Local newspapers, institutional Web sites, and alumni magazines are appropriate choices. The notice should reach all constituencies but should not unduly Page 5

6 burden the institution. The notification should follow the prescribed format; a sample notification is available on the Commission s Web site under Third Party Comment. information about the public disclosure of the upcoming visit, including sample announcements, to determine whether the institution made an appropriate and timely effort to notify the public and seek comments. The team also will evaluate the comments to determine whether the team needs to follow-up on any issues through its interviews and review of documentation during the visit process. Summary The Higher Learning Commission expects that accredited, candidate and applying institutions comply with federal regulations and demonstrate fulfillment through the Federal Compliance program explained in this document. Should the Commission receive any information to the contrary through an evaluation visit, the AIDU, institutional reporting, or other means the Commission will take any steps necessary to further assess the institution s noncompliance. However, the Commission does not itself determine compliance with federal law and regulations: such determinations are the province of the U.S. Department of Education or other appropriate body legally empowered to make such judgments. The Commission, instead, determines whether information it receives about the Federal Compliance requirements affects the institution s capacity to meet the Commission s Criteria for Accreditation and Commission policies. If the Commission finds that further review would benefit the institution s ongoing capacity to meet the Criteria, then the Commission may require monitoring such as a progress report or a focused visit. Significant noncompliance will result in a review of the institution s affiliation with the Commission. Contact for Questions: Department of Legal and Governmental Affairs Carrie Caine, Assistant, ext. 125 legalaffairs@hlcommission.org. Page 6