ACCREDITATION AND TRUSTEE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES April 9, 2015

Transcription

1 ACCREDITATION AND TRUSTEE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES April 9, 2015

2 AGENDA Accreditation s Purposes, Process and Standards The Roles and Responsibilities of Trustees The Restoration Process and What CCSF is Doing to be Reaffirmed 2

3 3

4 THE OPERATION OF US ACCREDITATION Most accrediting agencies, including ACCJC, receive recognition from the US Department of Education Regional accreditation- 7 commissions, 3000 institutions The recognition process is similar to the accreditation process; review every 5 years Other accrediting agencies- national faith-related, national career-related, programmatic 4

5 THE PURPOSES OF REGIONAL ACCREDITATION Provide quality assurance to the public, to students, to other institutions that an institution is achieving its stated mission Give credibility to degrees and credentials awarded to students for transfer and employment Stimulate institutional improvement through evaluation, planning, implementation and evaluation again Gain access to federal funds 5

6 THE QUALITY ASSURANCE PURPOSE OF ACCREDITATION Conduct regular reviews of quality (six-year cycle) through a comprehensive evaluation Monitor certain aspects of institutional quality (USDE Regulations) Student Achievement/Institutional Effectiveness Substantive Changes/Distance Learning Financial Integrity/Financial Aid Issues Integrity in Relation to Students, the Public Inform the USDE, Students the Public of Results Evaluation reports and visits as needed 6

7 THE IMPROVEMENT PURPOSE OF ACCREDITATION The accreditation process is designed to help institutions focus on helping students learn what they are supposed to learn, and to complete courses, certificates, degrees, and transfer or get jobs. The accreditation process builds institutional capacity for educational excellence and institutional effectiveness that produces desired forms of student success. Accreditation aims to develop a culture of continuous quality improvement through an ongoing cycle of program review, analysis, planning and budgeting with an emphasis on collecting and evaluating data. 7

8 ACCREDITING COMMISSION FOR COMMUNITY AND JUNIOR COLLEGES ACCJC is a subpart of Western Association of Schools and Colleges, the only agency dedicated to 2 year colleges ACCJC accredits 140 public and private institutions offering 2 year programs Region covers California, Hawaii and northern Pacific Island territories Offices are in Novato. Staff of approximately 8 employees. 8

9 WHO ARE THE ACCJC COMMISSIONERS? 5 Faculty from Member Institutions 3 Administrators from Member Institutions 1 from California Community Colleges System 1 from Pacific Institutions 1 from University of Hawaii System 1 ACSCU and 1 from ACS 1 from the private Member Institutions 5 from the public 9

10 WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW? Institutional self evaluation External evaluation by professional peers Commission evaluation -- the body of 19 Commissioners renders a judgment on the accreditation status of the institution Institutional improvement A Six to Ten Year Cycle of Review 10

11 ACCJC ACTIONS Reaffirm accreditation Reaffirm accreditation, follow-up report Reaffirm accreditation, follow-up report and visit Defer Decision Sanctions Termination Restoration 11

12 ACCJC SANCTIONS Warning- deviation from standards Probation- deviates significantly Show Cause substantial noncompliance 12

13 IF THE INSTITUTION IS FOUND TO BE NON-COMPLIANT WITH THE STANDARDS, HOW LONG MAY IT TAKE TO COMPLY? US Department of Education two-year rule Commission works with institutions as they improve, and can extend the time allowed for good cause Accreditation team recommendations feed into institutional plans for improvement ACCJC says its recognition is threatened by non-compliant institutions 13

14 ACCJC DATA ON SANCTIONS 5 YEAR TREND Colleges on Sanction January 2010 January 2014 Top Deficiencies Causing Sanctions Please note category increasing in frequency in table above 14

15 MOST RECENT ACCJC ACTIONS June of 11 colleges received reaffirmation on a comprehensive visit Warning- 2 Probation- 5 January of 13 colleges received reaffirmation on a comprehensive visit Warning -3 Show Cause-1 (Samoa) 15

16 Timeline of CCSF Accreditation History 16

17 17

18 ACCJC PUBLICATIONS OF INTEREST TO GOVERNING BOARDS 18

19 ROLE OF ACCREDITATION LIAISON OFFICER (ALO) ACCJC communicates via CEO 2 nd point of contact is designated ALO Main duties of ALO Maintain institutional records of accreditation Organize institutional responses to Eligibility Requirements, Accreditation Standards, and Commission Policies Promote understanding of accreditation Prepare for site visits Facilitate timely reports 19

20 WHAT ARE THE ACCREDITATION STANDARDS? Eligibility Requirements (21 ERs) Standards of Accreditation (4 main standards) Commission Policies (31 of them) Operating on adopted 2014 Accreditation Standards (previous reports prepared based on 2002 version) 20

21 WHAT ARE THE FOUR MAIN ACCREDITATION STANDARDS? Standard I: Mission and Institutional Effectiveness Data-driven assessment and improvement, focus on learning Standard II: Student Learning Programs and Services Instructional, Support and Learning Services, focus on learning and student outcomes Standard III: Resources Deployment of resources toward achievement of mission, fiscal integrity maintained to insure continued operation Standard IV: Leadership and Governance Leadership to focus institution on mission and student success, roles of governance structures, CEO and governing board 21

22 IMPORTANT IDEAS EMBEDDED IN THE STANDARDS Focus on achieving institutional mission, avoiding diversion to other purposes Integrity and honesty in institutional policies and actions Focus on student outcomes completion of meaningful education, learning, demonstrable knowledge and skills Metrics and evidence used to assess institutional quality Ongoing internal Quality Assurance Practices Continuous improvement for high performance 22

23 METRICS: INSTITUTIONAL MEASURES Key metrics, or measures, must be identified by the institution to assess achievement of institutional mission These may be mission specific/ are related to the institution s set of educational programs There should be data over five years prior to the Institutional Self Evaluation Report Institution should set targets or goals, or benchmarks Institutional performance on key metrics should be examined regularly and used for decision making at the institution 23

24 Trustees Have Two Challenges: 1) Mission Directed Leadership, and 2) High Performance Setting standards of excellence and measuring performance linked to the District s goals will help meet both challenges. To perform well Trustees must be accountable as well as hold others accountable. 24

25 MEASURING PERFORMANCE The Board leads the College the Board representing the entire community establishes the mission and vision for the College and from that staff develops strategic goals reflected in college plans and methods of achieving them. The roles are iterative, the final mission and vision must be approved by the Board. The Board must then assure itself that the College goals are achieved (as an example, the 2012 target date for the completion of the SLO process as required by ACCJC). Focus on the what not the how. 25

26 METRICS: ACCJC MEASURES Common measures of institutional effectiveness include: Course completion Enrollment in next course in sequence Completion of sequences, certificates, degrees Graduation, transfer, job placement Student learning of general skills and knowledge areas broadly applicable to life and work* -- degree SLOs Student learning of specific skill sets* and knowledge associated with the area of study program SLOs *Federal and national pressures are strong in this area. 26

27 ARE INSTITUTIONS EXPECTED TO MEET ALL ACCREDITATION STANDARDS AT ALL TIMES? Member institutions agree to adhere to Accreditation Standards at all times when they seek initial accreditation Institutions should have ongoing internal quality review and quality improvement processes program review, planning, implementation of changes, assessment of learning outcomes, evaluation of institutional effectiveness Six-year cycle of accreditation checks on what should be ongoing institutional practices to review and improve quality 27

28 IMPORTANCE OF COLLEGE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Sample Planning Documents that must fit together to help organize and direct college efforts: The Mission and Vision of the College. The College s Educational Master Plan. The Facilities Master Plan, a Technology Plan, and Annual Budget. Unit Plans and Program Plans (eg. Student Equity, SSSP, Basic Skills) College resource allocation should reflect plans and priorities How does the Board hold the College accountable to assure compliance and timeliness? 28

29

30 The Board/CEO Partnership: Making It Work for Accreditation Restoration! April 9, 2015 Dustin Johnson, Board Chair, Los Rios Brian King, Chancellor, Los Rios CCD

31 A California community college made me what I am today.

32

33 Your homework: Two Parts.

34 City College Board Homework Accreditation Basics Get your diploma! Read Guide to Accreditation for Governing Board The answers are in it!

35

36

37

38 What are the major accreditation challenges?

39

40

41

42

43 Process for Review Institutional Self Evaluation External Peer Evaluation Commission Evaluation Accreditation Decision Institutional Improvement

44 The Four Standards I: Mission and Effectiveness II: Student Learning Programs/Services III: Resources IV: Leadership and Governance

45 Building a culture of evidence Take nothing on its looks; take everything on evidence. There s no better rule. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

46 Los Rios Board Self-Evaluation Fall and Spring Board Retreats Board Self-Evaluation Survey Board and Chancellor s Goals Review of Goals and Objectives

47 The Board/Chancellor Partnership The board hires and supports the CEO. The board delegates full responsibility and authority to the CEO to implement and administer board policies without interference and holds the CEO accountable to achieve shared goals.

48 Better is possible. It does not take genius. It takes diligence. It takes moral clarity. It take ingenuity. And above all, it takes a willingness to try. Atul Gawande

49

50 THE RESTORATION PROCESS AND WHAT CCSF IS DOING TO BE REAFFIRMED Restoration Status granted January 14, 2015 Restoration Status = in Accrediting Commission s judgment that 1. CCSF fully meets the Eligibility Requirements, and 2. CCSF has demonstrated compliance with all accreditation standards and policies OR demonstrated ability to fully meet them within two-year restoration period. City College has two years (January 2017) to meet or exceed ACCJC Eligibility Requirements, Accreditation Standards, and Commission Policies. 50

51 PROCESS AND TIMELINE FOR DEVELOPING INSTITUTIONAL SELF EVALUATION Formed Team2016! Developed Timeline (General and Detailed) Garnered constituent participation Built in governance review processes Participating in accreditation training Ensuring transparency via Google docs Developing action plans for the 32 areas noted by ACCJC 51

52 RESTORATION TEAM FINDINGS CCSF did meet over 80% of the accreditation standards Team identified 32 specific actions that need to be taken to fully comply with the standards within the two year restoration period. 52

53 STANDARD I: MISSION, ACADEMIC QUALITY AND INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS, AND INTEGRITY ACCJC noted actions to take to meet standards: Implement comprehensive plan for assessing student support needs of Ocean Campus and Centers Implement college wide plans, integrate planning, assess outcomes, summarize impact Clarify GE student learning outcomes; develop outcomes on quantitative reasoning; review counseling service and other service area outcomes 53

54 STANDARD I: MISSION, ACADEMIC QUALITY AND INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS, AND INTEGRITY CCSF actions to date to meet standards: Formed Fantastic Five group (Equity, SSSP, Basic Skills, AB86, Professional Development) Requested Technical Assistance from IEPI Implementing program review improvements Providing additional support to centers and student development, surveys, CCSSE discussions Building an SLO team approach to address outcomes definitions, assessments, involvement 54

55 STANDARD II:STUDENT LEARNING PROGRAMS AND SUPPORT SERVICES ACCJC noted actions to take to meet standards: Adopt a policy for the Award of credit Enforce published prerequisites Institutionalize practice of meeting with advisory boards in all Career Technical Education programs (and documenting) Implement comprehensive plan for assessing student support needs of Ocean Campus and Centers Continue to adhere to new deadlines related to timeliness of catalog and course schedule Develop comprehensive plan and equitable services (including library) at Centers Assess student needs 55

56 STANDARD II:STUDENT LEARNING PROGRAMS AND SUPPORT SERVICES CCSF actions to date to meet standards: Developing policy on Award of credit; standardizing process and implementation of prerequisites Developing sequencing documentation and process Developing process, timeline, and documentation for Career Technical Education advisory board meetings Conducting surveys at centers Redefining outcomes for quantitative reasoning / implementing SLO team approach Developing comprehensive plan for services at Centers 56

57 STANDARD III: RESOURCES ACCJC noted actions to take to meet standards: Monitor financial resources Address decline in FTES Prepare for end of the parcel tax and stability funding Verify audit findings being addressed fully Develop strategies for OPEB liability 57

58 STANDARD III: RESOURCES CCSF actions to date to meet standards: Improving the budget development process Monitoring FTES / implementing enrollment management practices Considering various budget scenarios Continuing labor negotiations Establishing clean audits Improving bond ratings evidenced by upgrades 58

59 STANDARD IV: LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE ACCJC noted actions to take to meet standards: Improve and clarify processes Use results of evaluation for continuous improvement Improve communications college wide 59

60 STANDARD IV: LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE CCSF actions to date to meet standards: Discussed at Participatory Governance Council on improvements and action plan Discussions occurring at constituent level to improve communications PGC discussions include review of committee structures and processes Drafting plans to include additional assessment and surveys to gage progress 60

61 IMMEDIATE NEXT STEPS Finalize actions plans by April 30th Refine action plans from April 30th deadline to constituent review and board approval in May Import action plans in Smartsheet Roadmap from Google Docs Use information from ACCJC training in April and May to revisit our Self Evaluation process and timeline; clarify additional expectations Keep momentum of the workgroups and responsible units to stay on task of implementing the action plans 61