Follow-up Reporting Expectations Part II

1. Follow-up Reporting Expectations Part II MSCHE 2009 Annual Conference Mary Ellen Petrisko

2. 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 (Draft)

3. 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

4. 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 well-organized appendices generally the best approach • Length should be proportionate to number and complexity of issues addressed

5. Report organization and format • As for progress reports • Title page • Introduction • Progress to date and current status • Appendices of supporting documentation • Conclusion

6. Submittal of reports • Same as for progress reports • If paper, four copies bound ONLY by staples or clamps (NO binders or folders) • Send to Evaluation Services Office at the Commission • If electronic: send as email attachments to info@msche.org or cmorrison@msche.org

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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