Follow-up Reporting Expectations. MSCHE Annual Conference 2012 Sean McKitrick Mary Ellen Petrisko MSCHE Vice Presidents

Transcription

1 Follow-up Reporting Expectations MSCHE Annual Conference 2012 Sean McKitrick Mary Ellen Petrisko MSCHE Vice Presidents

2 What is the purpose of follow-up? To assure the Commission of ongoing compliance with Standards To provide the Commission with evidence of coming back into compliance with Standards

3 When is follow-up required? After Self-Study evaluation visit After Periodic Review Report After previous follow-up report After evidence that institution may not meet requirements of affiliation or standards

4 Types of follow-up reports Progress reports (previously known as progress letters) Monitoring reports Supplemental reports

5 Progress Reports when an institution meets the Commission s standards but the Commission needs assurance that the institution is carrying out activities that the institution has reported as planned or being implemented. --Guidelines, Follow- Up Reports and Visits

6 Monitoring Reports when the institution meets the Commission s standards, but the Commission has concerns about ongoing compliance with one or more standards. when the Commission places the institution on warning or probation because of a lack of evidence that the institution is in compliance with one or more standards. --Guidelines: Follow-Up Reports and Visits

7 Supplemental Reports The Commission postpones an accreditation decision and requests a supplemental report when it has insufficient information to substantiate compliance with one or more accreditation standards. Intended only to allow institution to provide further information, not to give the institution time to formulate plans or initiate remedial action Short-time line

8 Length of progress reports No prescribed length Previous guidelines said usually no more than five pages often not enough, depending on the issue, but A progress report addressing a solitary, limited issue, might only run a page or two plus supporting documentation. Relatively short reports with well-organized appendices are generally the best approach : Brevity with substance

9 Length of monitoring and supplemental reports No length prescribed Previous guidelines said to limit monitoring reports to 25 pages, supplemental reports to 15 Relatively short reports with wellorganized appendices generally the best approach Length should be proportionate to number and complexity of issues addressed

10 Format of follow-up reports Use template of title page provided on website, under Forms Online Introduction: brief overview of institution, context on issue(s) addressed in report Progress to date/current status: For each issue addressed: substantive summary, discussion, analysis of actions taken If appropriate, details on next steps

11 Format, continued Appendices/supporting documentation: Evidence supporting statements made in the report e.g., if topic is planning, include copy of strategic (or other relevant) plan if topic is assessment, see Assessing Student Learning and Institutional Effectiveness: Understanding Middle States Expectation for information on documentation

12 Format, continued Conclusion Brief summary and analysis of institution s progress and current status Address each matter in the report Keep conclusion evidence-based Avoid unsubstantiated assertions

13 Timing of reports Depends on seriousness of situation: can be as soon as within four months of Commission action Depends on amount of time that an institution can be expected to need to achieve results desired by Commission Balance between time needed by institution, Commission s concern with compliance

14 Timing of reports Due date is included in Commission action communicated in letter to president and included in Statement of Accreditation Status (on website) Timing: No Visit Required Visit Required April 1 March 1 October 1 September 1 December 1 November 1

15 Preparing an effective report READ AND UNDERSTAND THE COMMISSION S ACTION Understand the Commission s underlying concerns and expectations Read the relevant standard(s) and their fundamental elements in Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education Review all reports considered by Commission when it took its action

16 Preparing an effective report, cont d Address everything that is required Write the report so that it clearly addresses the issues specified in the action Don t make the readers search for requested information Focus on past and present, not intentions or pledges for the future No I m a gonna s

17 Preparing an effective report, cont d Focus on outcomes Provide documented evidence Be forthright and honest Be concise and well organized Respect the readers time and energy: unnecessarily voluminous reports may frustrate and confuse the reader Avoid data dumps and exclude irrelevant information and documentation

18 Preparing an effective report, cont d Make the report easy to follow If report is extensive, begin with outline of contents Use subheadings, charts, bulleted text as appropriate Clearly label supporting documents and provide clear references to them in text Submit the report on time Commission may consider an institution to have voluntarily allowed its accreditation to lapse if its report is not submitted on time

19 Report submittal May be submitted on paper or by If paper: four copies bound ONLY by staples or paper clamps (NO binders or folders) Send to Evaluation Services Office at the Commission If electronic: send as attachments to Voluminous appendices may be burned onto CD or provided through clear links to online resources

20 Follow-up visits Commission liaison guidance visits (previously known as staff visits) Small team visits Substantive change visits to branch campuses and additional locations (addressed in separate guidelines)

21 Follow-up visits Commission Liaison Guidance visits To provide additional information so that institution fully understands Commission s concerns Typically conducted by vice president Discussion of standards and expectations Schedule varies according to issues at hand NOT accreditation reviews; no Commission action other than to note visit

22 Follow-up visits continued Small team visit May be directed after monitoring report or supplemental report Required after monitoring report if institution is on warning or probation Liaison identifies peer evaluators for team Number, backgrounds, expertise vary according to issues in report Liaison ordinarily accompanies team as resource

23 Scheduling of small team visits Typically last one or two days At least one week after report due date Early enough to allow for completion of team report, institutional response and chair s confidential brief at least two weeks prior to Committee on Follow-up Activities Liaison works with team chair and president on schedule for report submission

24 Commission review and actions Follow-up report (and if team visited, the team report, institutional response, and chair s confidential brief) is considered by the Committee on Follow-up Activities (composed of Commissioners) Reviewed by Commissioner reader and liaison Recommendation for action is forwarded to Commission (March, June and November meetings) Commission action is communicated to president, included in Statement of Accreditation Status

25 Remember! Institutions Statements of Accreditation Status, including most recent Commission actions, are always available through the Commission website, under Institutions Refer to the Follow-up Reports and Visits guidelines when preparing your report

26 Remember! Contact your Commission liaison with any questions

27 Questions?