1996
Western Association of Schools and Colleges
Other Regional Commissions in the United States
Regional Associations of the United States
Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges

Contents:
PART I - Introduction
Purposes of Accreditation
Standards and Policies
College-Commission Relationship
Accredited Status
Periodic Review
Candidate Status
Review and Appeal
Alteration of Evaluation Schedule

Eligibility Requirements for Accreditation
Documentation for Eligibility Applications

Part II Standards for Accreditation

Part III - Commission Policies

Part IV Accreditation Agencies and Related Organizations


Acknowledgments
T he Standards of Accreditation and Commission Handbook are refined over time and informed by the experience of hundreds of professionals who volunteer their time, their labors, and their wisdom to the work of the Commission. Institutional trustees, presidents, administrators, faculty members, staff, and students contribute their perspective through participation on evaluation teams, working on institutional self studies, serving on Commission Task Groups, and reviewing Commission papers.

A series of Task Groups organized around each of the major standards, augmented by special working groups drawn from the private institutions and from the institutional research community, provided advice throughout the development period. In addition, presentations at conferences, workshops with system and institutional representatives, and discussions with Accreditation Liaison Officers provided more comment. Organizations and associations were invited to provide comment, and they responded with valuable suggestions.

The development of this Handbook was further enhanced by the work of a national committee of regional accreditation Associate Directors. This committee reviewed all current regional accreditation eligibility requirements and threshold accreditation standards. The Commission adopted and incorporated much of the work of this group into the 1996 Standards of Accreditation.

The Commission Editorial Board, chaired first by Robert D. Jensen and then by Constance M. Carroll, coordinated the development of the 1996 Standards of Accreditation. Members of that Board were Commissioners Barbara Beno, Carmen Maldonado Decker, J. Robert Evans, Celina San Lin Ing, and Bruce Smith. Commission Consultant Frances Conn was a constant source of substantive insight and editorial refinement. Associate Director Judith Watkins served as overall project coordinator and editor of the Handbook. Sue Lundquist and Mary Ann Hilmes prepared and proofread the material for publication.

Part I : Introduction To The 1996 Edition
This handbook is intended for members of the community of community, junior, and specialized two-year colleges. It is for the use of institutions under review, members of evaluation teams, and others who are concerned with good practice in associate degree granting institutions.

Institutional accreditation by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) is a voluntary, nongovernmental process involving institutional self study and professional peer review. Standards for accreditation represent generally accepted definitions of good practice in education. Policies, procedures, and standards have been adopted and published by ACCJC after development by representatives of accredited institutions and review by accreditation liaison officers and institutional leaders.

New editions are published periodically as the Commission conducts systematic reviews of its standards, policies, and practices. Comments and suggestions should be submitted to the ACCJC Executive Director or any member of the Commission. Standards are under continuous review by ACCJC member institutions and the Commission.

This document is to be used in conjunction with companion volumes. The Guide to Institutional Self Study and Reports to the Commission is a reference book which includes instructions for completion and submission of reports to the Commission. The Handbook for Evaluators assists visiting teams in conducting on-site evaluations and preparing evaluation reports to the Commission. The Eligibility Brochure: Requirements for Accreditation spells out the core characteristics of an accreditable institution and the Commission's expectations of institutions to be considered for membership.

The Commission is recognized by the Commission on Recognition of Postsecondary Accreditation (CORPA), a nongovernmental agency that recognizes postsecondary accrediting bodies in the United States, and by the U.S. Secretary of Education.

The Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC)⁽¹⁾ is one of the six regional accrediting associations covering the United States whose purpose is continual improvement of education and cooperation among educational institutions and agencies. WASC was formed on July 1, 1962 to evaluate and accredit schools, colleges, and universities in California, Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau. WASC functions through a Board of Directors and three accrediting Commissions: the Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities, the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, and the Accrediting Commission for Schools. The Board of Directors consists of nine members, each accrediting Commission electing three members.

Each Commission, with the involvement of all participating institutions, develops its own standards, procedures, and fiscal policies under the authority and subject to the approval of the WASC Board of Directors. The accreditation actions of each Commission are certified by the Board of Directors of WASC. Accreditation ceases whenever an institution requests in writing that its accreditation be terminated, when the Commission formally acts to terminate accreditation, or when an institution fails to pay its annual fees.

Purposes of Accreditation
Voluntary nongovernmental institutional accreditation, as practiced by the Commission and the other regional commissions, is a unique characteristic of American education. No institution in the United States is required to seek accreditation; however, because of the recognized benefits, most of the eligible institutions in this and other regions have sought to become accredited. In many other countries the maintenance of educational standards is a governmental function.

While the Commission works to establish minimum standards of quality for institutions, its primary focus is to foster educational excellence. Each institution has the responsibility of defining characteristics of quality and excellence for itself and presenting evidence that such quality and excellence is being achieved. The is Commission tries to deal with institutional differences in ways that protect both general standards of excellence and individualized educational philosophy and practice.

Where an institution provides programs not commonly offered by accredited institutions of higher education in the United States, the institution bears the burden of demonstrating that the subject matter offered is appropriate to higher education, is academic in quality and rigor, and can be reviewed by peers from accredited institutions.

The Commission accredits institutions, not individual programs. Therefore, in addition to assessing academic quality, integrity, and effectiveness, the Commission emphasizes structures, processes, and resources.

In order to assist institutions in determining their educational effectiveness, the Commission has recognized five major purposes of accreditation:

1. To assure the educational community, the general public, and other organizations and agencies that an institution has clearly defined objectives appropriate to postsecondary education, has established conditions under which their achievement can reasonably be expected, appears in fact to be accomplishing them substantially, is so organized, staffed, and supported that it can be expected to continue to do so, and meets Commission standards.

2. To encourage institutional development and improvement through self study and periodic evaluation by qualified peer professionals.

3. To develop and use standards to assess and enhance educational quality and institutional performance, and to validate these standards by ongoing research.

4. To promote interchange of ideas among public and independent institutions through peer review.

5.To protect institutions against encroachments which might jeopardize their educational effectiveness or academic freedom.

Standards and Policies
Accreditation is a continuing process, the heart of which lies in periodic self-appraisal by each institution. In its initial application for candidacy or accreditation, and in preparation for each subsequent visit, every institution prepares an extensive report with primary emphasis on self-analysis and evaluation. Between scheduled visits, each institution addresses visiting team recommendations and submits Annual Reports.

As a result of extensive experience and research, the Commission has determined that there are certain basic characteristics of quality required of all institutions of higher education. These Commission standards, policies, and procedures are periodically reviewed and revised. Revisions are made as needed, based on research, the experience of the Commission and visiting teams, and comments of institutional representatives.

The College-Commission Relationship
In carrying out its functions, the Commission has established a "Code of Good Practice," both for its relations with the institutions it serves and with regard to its internal organization and procedures. The full text of this policy is to be found on pages 92-94.

Every institution seeking recognition by the Commission is expected to abide by the standards and policies of the Commission as stated in this Handbook and as may be developed in the future. As knowledge increases and the needs of society change, institutions are continually evolving in order to serve their students and community better. Consequently, the Commission continually reviews the role and validity of its standards and engages in widespread consultation with the accredited institutions in the region in order to incorporate their suggestions and receive their approval. The Commission conducts research to assess the validity, reliability, and usefulness of its standards and procedures as aids to institutional improvement.

The effectiveness of self-regulatory accreditation, however, depends upon the institution's acceptance of specific responsibilities, including complying with all of the standards and abiding by the Commission's policies, procedures, and decisions. There must be institutional commitment to, and involvement in, the accreditation process. The process assumes that each institution has the responsibility to accept an honest and forthright assessment of institutional strengths and weaknesses. As a consequence, a comprehensive self study report and peer evaluation are required. Only in this way will the validity and vitality of the accreditation process be ensured.

In its relations with the institutions it serves, the Commission is committed to:
1. Appraise institutions in terms of their own stated purposes within the context of Commission standards and interpret standards in ways that are relevant to the character of the particular institution, respecting institutional integrity and diversity.

2. Emphasize the value and importance of institutional self study, including systematic assessment of institutional effectiveness.

3. Assist and stimulate improvement in the educational effectiveness of the institution.

4. Conduct evaluation visits by experienced and qualified peers under conditions which, insofar as reasonably possible, ensure impartial and objective judgment, avoiding conflict of interest.

5. Include on evaluation teams representation from other institutions of similar purpose and academic programs.

6. Provide institutions an opportunity to object, for cause, to individual members assigned to the team designated to visit the institution, with special concern for possible conflict of interest.

7. Require each evaluation team chair to arrange consultation during the visit with administration, faculty, students, and trustees and to include during comprehensive visits a publicized opportunity for an open hearing.

8. Provide opportunity for the institution to respond in writing to the team report before it is completed and to appear before the Commission when the report is considered.

9. Provide opportunity for institutional representatives and the general public to attend portions of Commission meetings devoted to policies and other nonconfidential matters. See policy on "Public Access," page 90.

10. Encourage widespread discussion and serious consideration of major team recommendations.

11. Request a written response from an institution or refer a matter to the next evaluation team when the Commission's attention is drawn to the possibility that an institution may be in violation of Commission standards or policies. A special interim visit focused on specified concerns may be scheduled by the Commission.

12. Make an initial visit for candidacy or accreditation to an institution only on the written request of the chief executive officer of the institution.

13. Revisit an institution consistent with Commission policies and periodic evaluation procedures following due notice to the institution.

14. Permit withdrawal of a request for initial candidacy or initial accreditation at any time (even after evaluation) prior to final action by the Commission.

15. Revoke accreditation or candidacy only after advanced written notice.

16. Encourage continuing communication between the Commission and institutions through the liaison officer position in each institution. See policy on Accreditation Liaison Officer.

Accredited Status
The status of accreditation indicates that an institution has met Commission standards.

In meeting these standards the institution has:

1. Completed a period of intensive and comprehensive self study followed by an on-site evaluation of institutional performance demonstrating that it meets Commission standards.

2. Demonstrated that it operates at a satisfactory level of quality in its educational programs consistent with its stated purposes and consistent with Commission standards.

3. Demonstrated the availability of sufficient resources to support existing and planned activities at a satisfactory level of quality and offered reasonable grounds for belief that there will continue to be adequate resources in the future.

4. Committed itself to institutional improvement, periodic self-evaluation, and continuing compliance with all Commission standards, policies, procedures, and decisions.

Periodic Review
Accreditation is attained by the process of evaluation of an entire institution and continues until formally withdrawn. It is subject, however, to periodic review and to conditions as determined by the Commission. Every accredited institution files an Annual Report and undergoes a comprehensive self study and evaluation at least every six years. A Midterm Report describing progress in responding to team recommendations is submitted in the third year following the evaluation visit. The Commission may request special Interim Reports and visits to assure progress in addressing specified issues of concern.

If an institution undergoes significant change or if its educational effectiveness is questioned, the Commission reserves the right to review that institution's is accreditation without regard to any previously indicated time pattern.

As a voluntary, nongovernmental agency, the Commission is not obligated to exercise the regulatory control of state and federal governments or to apply their mandates regarding collective bargaining, affirmative action, health and safety regulations, and the like. Furthermore, the Commission does not enforce the standards of specialized accrediting agencies or other nongovernmental organizations, or the laws and regulations of state agencies, although institutions may wish to review the publications of other such agencies as part of the self study process. The Commission has its own standards and expects that institutions and teams will apply them with integrity, imagination, and an attitude of humane concern for students and the public interest.

When an institution is granted accreditation, the following shall appear in all appropriate publications:

(Name of institution) is accredited by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, an institutional accrediting body recognized by the Commission on Recognition of Postsecondary Accreditation and the US Department of Education.

Candidate Status
Candidate for Accreditation status offers both new and established institutions the opportunity to establish a publicly recognized relationship with a regional accrediting agency. It is a pre-accreditation status, initially awarded for two years. Candidacy indicates that an institution has achieved initial recognition and is progressing toward accreditation. Candidacy is a period in which the institution undertakes the necessary steps to reach demonstrable compliance with Commission standards. Candidate status may not exceed four years.

An institution granted candidacy must use the following statement if it wishes to describe that status publicly:

(Name of institution) is a candidate for accreditation by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, an institutional accrediting body recognized by the Commission on Recognition of Postsecondary Accreditation and the US Department of Education.

Candidate for Accreditation is a status of preliminary affiliation with the Commission initially awarded for two years. The Commission may renew candidate status for an additional two years, grant initial accreditation following institutional self study and on-site evaluation visit, or terminate candidacy. Candidacy may not exceed four years. Candidacy is not accreditation and does not assure eventual accreditation.

Review and Appeal
Institutions whose applications for candidacy, renewal of candidacy, accreditation, or reaffirmation of accreditation are denied, or whose candidacy or accreditation is terminated by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, may request a review of the Commission's decision. Such a review must be requested prior to a filing of an appeal by the institution to the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). The policies and procedures which govern the conduct of the Commission's review are found in the Western Association of Schools and Colleges Constitution (pages 124-132).

An institution which, after availing itself of the review procedure of the Commission, still believes itself aggrieved by the Commission's denial or withdrawal of candidacy or accreditation, may appeal such action within thirty days of receipt of notice thereof to the President of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. The WASC President shall arrange a hearing for representatives of the institution before the Association's Hearing Board, established for this purpose, as prescribed in Article VI of the Constitution of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (pages 128-131).

Alteration of Evaluation Schedule
An institution may petition the Accrediting Commission for alteration of its evaluation schedule. A written request submitted to the Executive Director will be considered by the Commission if the request is based on:

1. A plan to coordinate evaluation of institutions in a system.

2. Disaster, such as fire, flood, or earthquake that impedes the normal conduct of institutional business for an extended period of time.

3. Severe and unusual circumstances that unavoidably disrupt the self study process or scheduled team visit.

4. Substantive changes in the mission or status of the institution.

Eligibility For Accreditation
Eligible institutions offering one or more programs of two academic years leading to the Associate Degree, located in the states of Hawaii and California, the territories of Guam and American Samoa, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands, the Republic of Palau, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands may apply to the Commission for candidacy.

Prior to making a formal application, an institution wishing to become a Candidate for Accreditation must begin by assessing itself in relation to the basic criteria for institutional eligibility, stated below. The standards of accreditation and Commission policies should also be reviewed, as they will provide a clear statement of ultimate Commission expectations of institutional performance and quality and give further definition to the eligibility criteria. The eligibility process is designed to screen institutions prior to a period of formal and extensive institutional self study so that only institutions which meet the basic criteria for eligibility may proceed.

The Commission uses the same self study and site visit process for both candidacy and accreditation applications. The results of a candidacy or initial accreditation visit could be denial, candidacy, or accreditation. Clearly, the history of the applicant institution will have great bearing on the Commission's decision.

Eligibility Requirements For Accreditation
(Adopted June 1995; Revised January 1996)

Compliance with the requirements is expected to be continuous and will be validatedperiodically, normally as part of every institutional self study and comprehensive evaluation. Institutions are expected to include in their self study reports information demonstrating that they continue to meet the eligibility requirements.

Authority
1. The institution is authorized to operate as an educational institution and to award degrees by an appropriate governmental organization or agency as required by each of the jurisdictions or regions in which it operates.

In California, 94310.3A (or subsequent statute) approval by the California Council for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education is required for private institutions. The institution shall submit a copy of its articles of incorporation.

Mission
2. The institution's educational mission is clearly defined, adopted, and published by its governing board consistent with its legal authorization and is appropriate to a degree-granting institution of higher education and the constituency it seeks to serve.

Governing Board
3. The institution has a functioning governing board responsible for the quality and integrity of the institution and for ensuring that the institution's mission is being carried out. Its membership is sufficient in size and composition to fulfill all board responsibilities.

The governing board is an independent policy-making body, capable of reflecting constituent and public interest in board activities and decisions. A majority of the board members have no employment, family, or personal financial interest in the institution.

Chief Executive Officer
The institution has a chief executive officer who is appointed by the governing board and whose primary responsibility is to the institution.

Administrative Capacity
5. The institution has sufficient staff with appropriate preparation and experience to provide the administrative services necessary to support its mission and purpose.

Operational Status
6. The institution is operational with students actively pursuing its degree programs.

Degrees
A substantial portion of the institution's educational offerings are programs that lead to degrees, and a significant proportion of its students are enrolled in them.

Educational Programs
8. The institution's principal degree programs are congruent with its mission, are based on recognized higher education field(s) of study, are of sufficient content and length, and are conducted at levels of quality and rigor appropriate to the degrees offered. At least one degree program must be of two academic years in length.

Academic Credit
9. The institution awards academic credits based on generally accepted practices in degree-granting institutions of higher education. Public institutions governed by statutory or system regulatory requirements should provide appropriate information regarding the award of academic credit.

Educational Objectives
10. The institution defines and publishes for each program the program's educational objectives for students.

General Education
The institution defines and incorporates into all of its degree programs a substantial component of general education designed to ensure breadth of knowledge and promote intellectual inquiry. The general education component should include demonstrated competence in writing and computational skills and an introduction to some of the major areas of knowledge. Degree credit for general education programs should be consistent with levels of quality and rigor appropriate to higher education.

Faculty
12. The institution has a substantial core of qualified faculty with full-time responsibility to the institution and sufficient in size and experience to support all of the institution's educational programs. A clear statement of faculty responsibilities must exist.

Student Services
13. The institution provides for all of its students appropriate student services and development programs consistent with student characteristics and its institutional mission.

Admissions
14. The institution has adopted and adheres to admission policies consistent with its mission that specify the qualifications of students appropriate for its programs.

Information And Learning Resources
15. The institution owns or otherwise provides specific long-term access to sufficient information and learning resources and services to support its mission and all of its educational programs.

Financial Resources
16. The institution documents a funding base, financial resources, and plans for financial development adequate to support its mission and educational programs and to assure financial stability.

Financial Accountability
The institution regularly undergoes and makes available an external financial audit by a certified public accountant or an audit by an appropriate public agency. The institution shall submit a copy of the current budget and a copy of the current audited financial statement prepared by an outside certified public accountant who has no other relationship to the institution. The audit must be certified and any exceptions explained. It is recommended that the auditor employ as a guide Audits of Colleges and Universities, published by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.

Institutional Planning And Evaluation
18. The institution provides evidence of basic planning for the development of the institution, planning which identifies and integrates plans for academic personnel, learning resources, facilities, and financial development, as well as procedures for program review and institutional improvement.

The institution engages in systematically evaluating how well and in what ways it is accomplishing its purposes, including assessment of student learning and documentation of institutional effectiveness.

Public Information
19. The institution publishes in its catalog or other appropriate places accurate and current information that describes its purposes and objectives, admission requirements and procedures, rules and regulations directly affecting students, programs and courses, degrees offered and the degree requirements, costs and refund policies, grievance procedures, academic credentials of faculty and administrators, and other items relative to attending the institution and withdrawing from it.

Relations With The Accrediting Commission
20. The governing board provides assurance that the institution adheres to the eligibility requirements and accreditation standards and policies of the Commission, describes itself in identical terms to all its accrediting agencies, communicates any changes in its accredited status, and agrees to disclose information required by the Commission to carry out its accrediting responsibilities.

Documentation For Eligibility Applications
The Commission recognizes that not every institution begins the process of affiliation from the same place. A public institution which has existed as a branch or center of an established college will be very different from a new private college, and both will be different from an established specialized institution. The documents listed below are intended to be guidelines indicating Commission expectations for colleges preparing for an Eligibility Review. It is in the college's best interest to provide as much relevant information as possible to assist staff review and the Commission decision-making process.

Authority
-Degree-granting approval statement or certificate from appropriate body.

-Articles of incorporation (private institutions).

Mission
-Copy of mission statement as it appears in a published catalog or other public document.

-Minutes of governing board meeting where mission statement was adopted.

3. Governing Board

-Biographical information on the governing board members.

-Copy of governing board by-laws and statement of board responsibilities.

-Certification that the board does not have a majority of persons with employment, family, or personal interest in the institution signed by chief executive officer and governing board chair (private institutions).

Chief Executive Officer

-Name, address, and biographical information on chief executive officer.

-Certification of CEO's primary responsibility to the institution signed by chief executive officer and governing board chair.

5. Administrative Capacity

-Table of organization, including names of those in positions.

-Names and biographical information on administrative staff.

6. Operational Status

- Enrollment history of the institution.

- Enrollments in institutional degree programs by year or cohort, including degrees awarded.

- Current schedule of classes.

7. Degrees

- List of degrees, course credit requirements, and length of study for each degree program, including documentation of at least one degree program of two academic years.

- Catalog designation of college-level courses for which degree credit is granted.

8. Educational Programs

- Names of degrees which reflect the mission of the institution.

- Documentation from catalog or other public document which describes the

courses, units, and curricular sequence of the educational programs.

9. Academic Credit

- Institutional policies on transfer and award of credit.

- Formulae used by the institution to calculate values of academic credit.

10. Educational Objectives

- Catalog statements which establish educational objectives for programs.

- Outcomes data from educational program reviews.

- Graduation history.

11. General Education

- List of general education courses, including catalog descriptions.

- Course outlines for language and quantitative reasoning courses.

- Documentation of higher education rigor and quality.

12. Faculty

- Full-time and part-time faculty roster, including degrees and experience.

- Faculty responsibilities statement.

- Current schedule of classes identifying faculty responsible for each class.

Student Services

- Demographic characteristics of students.

- List of student services provided which reflects the mission of the institution.

14. Admissions

- Copy of admissions policy from a published statement.

- Copy of enrollment application.

- Statement of student qualifications for admission.

15. Information And Learning Resources

- Profile of holdings and resources.

- Copies of agreements for access to external resources.

16. Financial Resources

- Past, current, and proposed budgets and financial statements.

- Documentation of any external foundation or other funding support.

- Student loan default rates and relevant USDE reports, if a participant.

- Documentation of funding base.

17. FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY

- Past, current, and proposed budgets.

- Financial aid program reviews/audits, if a participant.

- Certified independent audit, including management letter.

18. INSTITUTIONAL PLANNING AND EVALUATION

- Most recent educational, fiscal, and facilities plans.

- Most recent institutional evaluations of student assessment and outcomes systems.

19. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE

- Catalog or other public document which serves that purpose.

- Recent print or other media advertisements.

- Policies regarding public disclosure.

20. RELATIONS WITH THE ACCREDITING COMMISSION

- Copy of policy adopted and published by the governing board assuring compliance with

this criterion.

- List of other accreditation held by the institution.

- Copy of directory pages which describe the institution's representation by those

accrediting bodies.

1. For the WASC Constitution and list of candidate and accredited institutions, see the annual WASC Directory, which is available from each Commission office or from WASC, 533 Airport Boulevard, Suite 200, Burlingame, CA 94010. For a list of regional accrediting associations and related bodies see pages 121-22