SACS Reaffirmation Project Compliance
Certification Team Orientation
Compliance Certification Report
Thursday, September 30, 2010
209 Main Building – Lexmark Public Room
9 – 11:00AM
Jennifer Skaggs, Ph.D.
SACS Reaffirmation Project Director
University of Kentucky
Internal Timeline & Checklist –
Year One

October 2010
◦ Review basic SACS documents





Principles of Accreditation
Resource Manual (Team Leaders)
Official SACS website (www.sacscoc.org)
Familiarize self with principle(s) and UK’s 5th year report and 2002 self-study
November 2010
◦ Review examples from other institutions
 Be sure to include samples from UK’s 5th year report & 2002 Self-Study if
applicable
◦ Post examples on SharePoint site

January 2011
◦ Specific evidence collection ramps up
 Post to SharePoint site
 Using Tables and Charts when it’s effective
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
2
Internal Timeline & Checklist –
Year One (continued)

February 2011
◦ Work on narrative ramps up
◦ Specificity and illustrations are important

March 2011
◦ Place evidence in targeted PDF form whenever possible
 Don’t make the reviewer “hunt” for the information

May 2011
◦ Have narratives prepared in “first draft” form
 Have links to evidence embedded into the narrative
 Allows selected UK Leadership to be prepared for their SACS
Orientation meeting in Atlanta
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
3
Internal Timeline & Checklist –
Year One (continued)

July 2011
◦ Polish writing narratives to be “one voice”
◦ Match narratives with links to evidence

September 2011
◦ Complete draft due with YOUR judgment of compliance

October 2011**
◦ Initiation of final editing
◦ Address all issues of non/partial compliance
◦ Streamline electronic delivery

January 2012
◦ Leadership Team Review begins
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
4
Narratives

The design of the narrative sets expectations, shapes
the first impression, and foreshadows the content.

Well-structured narrative designs
◦ Avoid the halo/reversed halo effect
◦ Demonstrate understanding of the concept
◦ Organized well with good examples from minutes,
catalogs, etc.
◦ Include clear, substantial evidence which addresses each
standard directly.
◦ Use/integrate SACS language making it easy to see
connections between responses and standards
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
5
Evidence

Provides illustration and proof of
compliance
 Pattern of evidence
 Weight of evidence

Uses flowcharts, graphs, tables, and other
visual tools to:
 Present and preview
 Integrate
 Summarize
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
6
Components of the Compliance
Standards
The Assertion
1.
◦
Statement of compliance status
The Evidence
2.
◦
◦
Testing the evidence
Determining what evidence is present
The Analysis
3.
◦
Linking the evidence to the assertion
The Conclusion
4.
◦
Restatement of the compliance status
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
7
Examples from Other Institutions

Southeastern Louisiana
◦ Combined SACS Campus Website with
Compliance Certification Report
 http://www2.selu.edu/sacs/

Prairie View A & M
◦ Separate SACS Campus Website and
Compliance Certification Report
 http://www.pvamu.edu/pages/4041.asp
 http://www.sacs.pantherconnect.com/index.html
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
8
Now it’s Your Turn…
The institution engages in ongoing,
integrated, and institution-wide researchbased planning and evaluation processes
that (1) incorporate a systematic review
of institutional mission, goals, and
outcomes; (2) result in continuing
improvement in institutional quality; and
(3) demonstrate the institution is
effectively accomplishing its mission.
(Core Requirement 2.5)
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
9
Questions to be asked by
Compliance Certification Teams







What are the focal points of your assigned
requirements/standards?
What might be the concerns of off- and on-site reviewers
regarding your assigned requirements/standards?
What UK policies and/or official procedures apply to these
requirements/standards?
What is the common practice at UK concerning these
requirements/standards?
Have recent reviews been conducted concerning these
requirements/standards?
Are there other policies and procedures needed to
document compliance with this topic?
Is there other evidence such as records, survey results,
reports, etc. needed to document compliance with this topic?
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
10
What to look for:

Look for numbers
 … (1) incorporate a systematic review of
institutional mission, goals, and outcomes; (2) result
in continuing improvement...etc.

Look for commas
 “The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and
institution-wide research-based planning and
evaluation processes…”

Look for compound-modifiers
 “institution-wide research-based planning and
evaluation processes.”
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
11
Core Requirement 2.5
(brief example)

Introduction
◦ SACS expects evidence of written policies and procedures that are being followed-the
introduction must include these written policies introducing the evidence of them being
followed.
◦ Organization of the IE process

Planning
◦ Strategic planning process
◦ Budgeting

Feedback Mechanisms
◦ Evaluation


Annual Reports
Personnel Evaluation
◦ Assessment



Unit/Program
Core Learning Areas
University
Document Accountability program reviews and specialized accreditations
 Continuous Quality Enhancement

◦ Student success
◦ Management Structures
◦ Funding

Conclusion
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
12
Questions?
CC Team Orientation CC Report 9/30/10
13