Western Association of Schools and Colleges Accrediting

advertisement
Western Association of Schools and Colleges
Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities
CHAIR AND TEAM STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT
Please return this page to the Visit Process Manager:
By email to swilliams@wascsenior.org or by fax to 510-995-1475
Team chairs and team members are expected to exhibit professional ethics in their review of
institutions. Evaluators are to conduct themselves with truth, accuracy, fairness, respect, and
awareness of their responsibilities to various publics, including the Commission, institution, higher
education community, and the general public. The statement Team Member Ethics, attached, further
details evaluator responsibilities and highlights the maintenance of confidentiality throughout the
review process. Each evaluator is asked to sign the statement below to indicate his/her
understanding of the position taken by the Commission with regard to ethical conduct of team
members.
In addition to these ethical principles, the Commission in ensuring that its decisions are based solely
on the application of professional judgment to institutional evaluation, seeks to avoid any potential
conflict of interest. A conflict of interest is defined as any circumstance in which an individual’s
capacity to make an impartial and unbiased accreditation decision may be affected because of a prior,
current, or anticipated institutional affiliation(s), or other significant relationship(s) with an
accredited institution or an institution seeking any recognition by the Commission. Affiliations that
would pose a conflict of interest to team members include: employee, former employee (during the
previous five years), applicant for employment (during the previous five years), board member
(including institutional foundation boards), appointee, paid consultant (during the previous three
years), current student, graduate. Other significant relationships include having a close relative
(spouse, child, or parent) affiliated with the institution under review. Such affiliations and significant
relationships should be disclosed below to the Commission staff as should other relationships or
personal interests that might prejudice decision-making. Institutions, in reviewing proposed teams,
are encouraged to bring to the attention of Commission staff any possible conflicts of interest.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST for XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Please specify any conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest with this institution:
I have read and fully understand the attached statement of Team Member Ethics, including the
condition that the confidentiality of material, discussions, and team recommendations related to
the institutional review is to be observed. I have also read the conflict of interest guidelines,
and, to the best of my knowledge, have disclosed all circumstances that may be considered
conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
NAME (Please print)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SIGNATURE
DATE
Rev 2/9/2009
Team Member Ethics
Team Chairs and evaluators are expected to exhibit the highest ethics in maintaining confidentiality
of the review and behaving professionally during the visit. In promoting high standards of ethical
conduct and public service, evaluators will address the following:

Conflicts of Interest – The Commission relies on the personal and professional integrity of
individuals to refuse any assignments when there is a real or appearance of a conflict of interest.
Each team member is to review the Commission policy “Conflict of Interest Statement” and
report any conflict to the staff liaison.

Charges – Team members are asked to be circumspect in making telephone and food charges
while at the hotel. Institutions are billed for all such charges and WASC is committed to keeping
the cost of reviews as affordable as possible.

Acceptance of gifts - Institutions are discouraged from providing gifts and evaluators are asked
not to accept gifts in order to avoid any inferred conflict of interest.

Behavior toward others – Team members shall conduct themselves professionally, with truth,
accuracy, fairness, respect, and responsibility to others. They are expected to show courtesy
toward all institutional representatives, without regard to race, creed, color, national origin,
disability, or sexual preference. The Commission will not tolerate any instance of unprofessional
or unethical conduct, including instances of substance abuse or of sexual or other forms of
harassment.

Institutional materials - The evaluator is privileged to review all materials at an institution,
including those of greatest confidentiality. Acquisition of institutional materials for use at an
evaluator's home campus is prohibited, unless institutional permission is obtained following the
visit. This includes all evaluation materials provided by the institution, exhibit files, and notes.

Confidentiality - Team members shall safeguard the confidentiality of all materials reviewed
and the confidences of all parties interviewed. They should not discuss the process or results of
the review outside of the team environment. All matters related to the institution’s review
should be held in the strictest confidence. This includes observations from interviews,
discussions of team members and WASC staff, team observations, the team’s confidential
recommendation to the Commission, and the Commission’s eventual action. Particularly
problematic is revealing in part or in totality the team’s recommendation to the Commission.
WASC staff have the responsibility of communicating with the institution about all matters
related to the team report and Commission action.

Future relationships – Team members should never use the review process for their personal
gain, including the establishment of an employment or consulting relationship. Evaluators shall
refrain from employment or consulting for one year following the conclusion of the review.
Should any questions arise on any of these matters, please contact WASC staff.
Download