1
THE ANATOMY OF A COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION AT A
TRACK B INSTITUTION
ALLAN AYCOCK
JAN WHEELER
www.oap.uga.edu
SACSCOC Annual Meeting 2012, Dallas, TX
2
Planning for Compliance
Expected Outcomes
3
Participants will take away
 Critical approach for making strategic decisions
about the SACSCOC Compliance Certification process
 Sample forms, processes, and policies to support
those decisions
 Opportunities for networking with colleagues
Outside scope of presentation
 Preparation for on-site visit
 QEP development
We will address if time allows at end
4
About UGA as a Track B Institution
17 academic schools/colleges; 35,000 students; 10,000 employees; 1700
FT faculty; 400 degree programs; four extended campuses; and
. . . proudly decentralized.
At your tables . . .
5



Introduce yourselves, including current
position and SACSCOC responsibilities
Introduce your institution, including date you
will submit your Compliance Certification
Discuss and report
a)
b)
How many years prior to submission should you
start the Compliance Certification process?
One? Two? Three? Four? Five?
What are the significant considerations for
determining when to start?
UGA Timeline
6
Spring
2008
Spring
2006
Plan to meet compliance challenges
Late spring
Su08
2008
Compliance Audit
Fall08
Sp09
Su09
Fall09
Sp10
Narrative drafting, editing/system development
Assemble teams/
chairs:
Compliance
Charge Teams
Leadership
QEP
Su10
Sept
2010
Final drafts/approvals
Data snapshots
Submit CC!
SACSCOC orientation
of leaders
Key Strategic Decisions
7
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Adopt organizational structure and
budget/technical support plan
Design work plan for your Compliance Team
Envision your final work product
Decide on a consistent message
Identify specific compliance challenges
Please stand up . . .
8
How will you develop your system for Compliance
Certification?
You will use a vendor solution (e.g.,
Compliance Assist)
You have not decided on a vendor
solution or an internally built system
You will use internal resources to build
your system
Strategic Decision #1 – Organizational
Structure/Budget/Technical Support
9
Adopt a plan to provide day-to-day oversight
of the compliance and QEP processes over a 2
to 3-year period
 Existing
office or a special office dedicated to
the process?
 What budget is available to provide this
support?
 Who will provide the extensive technical
support required to produce the Compliance
Certification and organize supporting electronic
documentation?
Organizational Structure
10
UGA Approach
 Existing
Office of Academic Planning managed the
process
 Estimates of time allocated over two years:






Associate Provost – 40%
Director of Assessment and Accreditation – 50%
Associate Director of Accreditation – 100%
Assistant to the Associate Provost – 40%
Editor for the SACSCOC Reaffirmation Process – all of
half-time assignment
Two graduate assistants – 50% of half-time assignments
 Office
of Institutional Research made reaffirmation a
top priority over two years
Technical Support
11
UGA Approach
Enterprise Information Technology Services dedicated a
team to reaffirmation and added resources as needed




Implemented commercial solution to store and manage
faculty activity data
Designed internal credentialing system to integrate key
faculty and course data
Designed internal system to manage planning and
assessment data
Designed internal system to develop the Compliance
Certification
12
Two-year budget for the
compliance process
UGA approach
In addition to significant internal allocations of effort
from the Office of Academic Planning, the Office of
Institutional Research, and the Office of Enterprise
Information Technology Services, the following were
needed:





Half-time editor
Printing
Supplies
Professional meeting expense
Software to build Faculty Activity Repository
At your tables . . .
13
Given: Compliance Certification requires long-term
cooperation and significant labor from senior
administrators, faculty, staff, and students?
Discuss and report:
Who at your campus is best able to lead this effort?
a)
Senior dean
b) Senior faculty member
c)
Senior administrator
d) SACSCOC liaison
e)
Other
14
Strategic Decision #2 –
Your Work Plan
Design a detailed work plan that fits the specific needs
and culture of your campus
 Who will lead your teams?
 How will you structure the teams?
 How will you manage the work flow?
 How will the final work product be approved before
submission to SACSCOC?
Work Plan
15
UGA Approach

Expertise—Compliance Team
Large group of campus experts in the specific areas
addressed by the Principles (n=38)
 Chaired by former law school dean currently active in
university governance
 Reported to small SACSCOC Leadership Team (chaired by
the president)
 Working groups for areas needing focused attention


Time—Team formation and orientation

Formal charge to team two years prior to due date of
Compliance Certification
Work plan—working groups
16








Faculty Credentialing
Institutional Effectiveness
Advising
International Programs
Distance Education
Extended Campuses
Substantive Change
Document Review Panel
Work Plan—Process
17
Developing compliance narratives
 Compliance
audit (documentation assembly)
 Drafting process (more documentation)
 Expert
in area or working group
 Resources and consultation with OAP staff
 Review
process (more documentation)
 OAP
staff, editor, Document Review Panel, Liaison,
Leadership Team
 Final
formatting
 Testing/quality assurance/“slamming the doors”
At your tables . . .
18
Possible format(s) for submitting your
Compliance Certification:
Print only
Print and Online
Online only
Print and USB/CD
USB/CD only
Online and USB/CD
Print, Online, and USB/CD
Discuss and report:
What does SACSCOC require? (consensus
answer, no smart phone use)
What will your institution submit?
Strategic Decision #3 – Format of your
Compliance Certification
19
Begin the process with a design guide for the Compliance
Certification
 What format(s) will it be?
 What will it look like?
 How will it function?
 How will it be transmitted?
Goal in all: communicate authority, transparency,
thoroughness . . . compliance
Compliance Certification—Format
20
UGA approach=everything
 Submitted
a printed, bound, multi-color
Compliance Certification
 USB drive with Compliance Certification and all
supporting documents (except Faculty Roster)
 Online, password-protected access to
Compliance Certification and all supporting
documents and selected live web sites
21
Compliance Certification—Key
Design Elements
UGA Approach
 pdf
format for supporting documentation
 highlighted
relevant portion of each supporting
document
 Footnotes
 Linked
in text with hover feature
directly to relevant page of document
 Searchable
document
 Document library
 Style guide
Transmittal?
22



FedEx?
UPS?
United States Postal Service?
Please stand up . . .
23

Proposition:
The SACSCOC reaffirmation process brings about
substantial, positive changes to the learning
environment at institutions.
 Do
you agree?
 Do most people on your campus agree?
Strategic Decision # 4 – Communicating
with the University Community
24
Adopt a communication strategy to ensure that
your campus views the Compliance Certification
process as one that will improve the learning
environment.
Communicating with campus
25
UGA approach


Focused first on improving the learning environment –
compliance with the principles will flow from this
Highlighted the specific improvements made to policy and
practice having long-term benefits, for example

Faculty Activity Repository

Academic Planning System

Online syllabi availability


Instructor credentialing process—study abroad faculty,
GTAs/GLAs
Archive of useful documentation
At your tables . . .
26
Discuss and report
a)
b)
What three to five Principles are most
challenging to documenting compliance on
your campus?
What makes them challenging?
Strategic Decision #5 – Your approach to
the most challenging compliance issues
27
Determine your strategic approach to
documenting compliance with


Principles known to be stumbling blocks in the
reaffirmation process
Principles that present unique challenges to your
institution
28
Major Compliance Issues: Full time
Faculty (2.8)
There is no formula for adequacy. How will you make
your unique case? What ratios and comparisons will you
use? How will you disaggregate the data?
UGA approach
•
•
•
•
•
Definition of full-time faculty and categories of faculty
Allocation of responsibilities for teaching, research, and service to
individual faculty
Support structures for faculty activities
Case for adequacy to carry out teaching, research, and service at the
institutional level
• Comparisons of student/faculty ratio with peers
• Comparison of class size with peers
• Processes to ensure ongoing adequacy (various review processes)
Then data at the college level, the department level, and for each
extended campus
29
Major Compliance Issues: Full time
Faculty (2.8)—continued
New Challenge
Documenting adequacy at the program level
How will you define “program?”
Major Compliance Issues: Faculty
Credentials for Teaching Activity (3.7.1)
30
How will you establish that every course taught
within the relevant time period was taught by
faculty qualified to teach that specific course?
UGA approach
• Established a comprehensive instructor of record policy
• Established required credentials policy for instructors of record
• Created a credentialing system for ongoing compliance with
policies
• Created a faculty activity repository using commercial software
• Prepared an electronic faculty roster with electronic access to:
• Faculty CV
• Detailed justification when needed
• Official course description and syllabus
• Transcript or other evidence of academic qualifications were not
available electronically
Faculty &
Course
databases for
rank info, list
of all courses
taught.
UGA Bulletin for detailed
course info, master
syllabus, & individual
syllabus
Final Product—UGA Faculty Roster
15
FAR—Linked
CVs for all
faculty
Credentialing
System—entered by
associate dean;
also linked to CV
Text added
directly into
Roster by
associate
dean (cut &
paste from
CV)
Major Compliance Issues: Substantive
Change (3.12.1)
32
How will you document that all substantive
changes have been identified and reported to
SACSCOC?
UGA approach
• Adopted and communicated internal policy about
identifying and reporting substantive changes
• Maintained record documenting decision-making
process for each potential substantive change
• Maintained record of all substantive changes
reported to SACSCOC
• Presented the policy, the decision making process,
and the record in the Compliance Certification
Major Compliance Issues: Institutional
Effectiveness—Educational Programs (3.3.1.1)
33
Will you use a commercial product or an internally
developed solution?
Will your Compliance Certification present a
representative sample of degree/certificate programs
or present all programs?
UGA approach
• Created Academic Planning System internally
• Presented full evidence from a representative sample of
programs (assessment plans, student learning outcomes,
assessment results, and changes implemented for each
program)
• Defined “representative”
• Plus provided full online access to Academic Planning System
(all programs)
Resources
34
Additional sample forms and process documents are
available at:
http://oap.uga.edu/about_oap/anatomy_2012
UGA’s Compliance Certification is open and online at:
https://sacs.uga.edu/
(also in the SACSCOC Resource Room)
Also consider:


Colleagues you have met today
Your track cohort
Thank you! . . . and good luck!
Allan Aycock aaycock@uga.edu
Jan Wheeler jwheeler@uga.edu