Assessing Counseling Services: Accreditation, Self-Assessment, or Both? Assessing Counseling Services: Accreditation, Self-Assessment, or Both? ACPA Annual Conference March 6, 2015 Tampa, FL Laura A. Dean, Ph.D. CAS Past-President Associate Professor College Student Affairs Administration University of Georgia

Presenter* Contributors:  Dr. M.J. Raleigh, Director, Counseling & Psychological Services, University of North Carolina – Pembroke  Dr. Dan Jones, Director, Counseling & Psychological Services, Appalachian State University Participants Current work role Experience with assessment International Association of Counseling Services (IACS) Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS) Other? * Presenter has no conflict of interest re: this topic. Introductions

Participants will be able to describe the purposes and principles of IACS accreditation and of CAS self- assessment Participants will be able to explain the reasons for choosing IACS or CAS, or for using both to assess counseling services Participants will be able to discuss the implications for practice of using IACS or CAS to assess counseling services Learning Objectives

 How many of you have participated in a CAS self study?  How many have completed a IACS review?  How many have completed both a CAS self study and the IACS accreditation process?  What questions or issues do you want to make sure we cover during this session? Setting The Context

 Accountability  Multiple constituents  Public credibility  Accreditation  Assessment  Emphasis on both program evaluation & outcomes  Data collection + evaluation against intended goal or criterion  Role of professional standards Quality Assurance in Higher Ed.

Certifies quality through standards, self-study, & external evaluation  Regional/institutional accreditation  Where counseling fits  Specialty  APA – accredits training sites, range of settings  Joint Commission – health svcs, range of settings  Behavioral Health component  IACS – International Association of Counseling Svcs  University & 4-year college counseling centers Accreditation

 Relationship of the Counseling Center to the University Community  Counseling Services Roles and Functions  Ethical Standards  Counseling Service Personnel  Related Guidelines  e.g., Professional Development, Staff Diversity, Staff Size, Workload  Statement on applicability in international settings IACS Sections

Advantages  Accreditation has credibility  Recommendations taken seriously  Specific targets, ratios, expectations  Experts review and evaluate  Can review records, look at legal/ethical issues  External perspective on local practice Limitations  Different process from other units in division  Administrators may be unfamiliar  Process does not generate campus understanding  Not available for community colleges, 2-year schools  Cost may be a factor if resources are limited IACS

Process is internal to an institution, using local processes or national standards  Locally developed frameworks  Within comprehensive institutional approach  Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS)  National standards, collaboratively developed  Can be adapted for local context Self-Assessment

1.Mission 2.Program 3.Organization & Leadership 4.Human Resources 5.Ethics 6.Law, Policy, & Governance 7.Diversity, Equity, & Access 8.Institutional & External Relations 9.Financial Resources 10.Technology 11.Facilities & Equipment 12.Assessment & Evaluation CAS Sections

Advantages  A local team can best understand the institutional context and circumstances  If CAS is used across the division, the approach and standards are understood  Process builds trust across areas represented on the team  Cost-effective – helpful when resources are limited Limitations  Self-study lacks the credibility of accreditation; recommendations may carry less weight  Unless an external review team is used, local team members may not have needed expertise in clinical areas  Team members cannot review files CAS

 Survey of counseling center directors – spring 2015  Membership of ACCA, also forwarded by CAS Board  137 responses  38% held IACS accreditation; 19% had conducted a CAS self- study  When asked why they didn’t do the other, most said it wasn’t needed in addition to the one being used  Sense that CAS isn’t counseling-specific enough  Cost of IACS; some centers ineligible  Lack of understanding of what each involves  Not clear on the rationale/advantages of using both Current Practice & Experiences

Case Example: A new director of counseling services realizes a few weeks into the new job that no assessment of the department has been done in over 10 years. Where do you begin? Clinical services satisfactionStaff evaluations Policy review/ developmentBenchmarking CAS self -assessmentIACS application Mission & goal development Timing is everything

 Rank order the assessment options for this new director. Which should be done first and which needs to be done last?  What will yield the most helpful results for this department to move forward?  What options would you add to this list? Discussion: With your neighbor

 What is the need/purpose?  IACS/CAS - choose intentionally  May be one or the other  May be one, then the other  May be both, integrated  Use of different lenses  What purpose is served by each?  Identifying the right question Asking the Right Question

 Stakeholders  Purpose  Use of outcome  Transparency (or fear/shame)  Admissions/PR push  $$$$/resources Elements of the Decision

What is the advantage of doing both? Parallel process – as they inform each other Consecutively – one to prep for the other Sequentially – one following the other as an independent process

What is the disadvantage of doing both? Duplicating process – is there repetition in what is examined and what information is gained? Resource drain – time required by staff/ financial drain Assessment fatigue – is there additional information that will make the effort worthwhile?

 When should this happen?  How are the department members involved?  IACS application requires a type of internal review  CAS relies heavily on good internal process  How does this inform the assessment process?  Compared to division expectations and community standards  Benchmarked against past performance  Less intense resource drain Internal Review

 When should this happen?  How does this inform the process?  IACS is solely external reviewers  CAS is first internal, external only if desired  Benchmarked against other institutions  Comparison across multiple standards and disciplines (APA, ACA, CMHC, MSW) External Review

 Who is on the review for both processes?  IACS: external to institution and to the department  CAS: internal to the division/institution with standards developed by professional organizations  What is the advantage and disadvantage of having different people from different departments & institutions looking at your work? Musical Chairs

 Forced to participate  Feeling this it is an ‘evaluation’ of job performance  Competition with other departments within the division or services in ‘sister’ schools  Fear that results will be used as a weapon  Administrative preferences push the agenda  Am I a failure if I don’t get accreditation?  Am I a failure if there are multiple areas with 0 or 1 in the CAS ratings? Emotional Baggage

How do these processes help me know if my students are learning? IACS: does not look at learning outcomes for students CAS: learning domains and learning outcomes are embedded in the process throughout Learning Outcomes

 Math phobia – too much data!?  Statistical data usage in the assessment process  Benchmarking  Tracking data  Data collection methods  How do I keep this meaningful to the ‘lay’ person? What’s scary?

 Set goals/plan to address results  Celebrate success  Breathe a sigh of relief until the next round of assessment while using the report to prop up a table??  Make available to the public through website access or other means How do we use the results of all this assessment?

 Both/and, rather than either/or  Complementary parts of full picture  IACS/CAS can be used together  What does it look like? Comprehensive Assessment

 Know your audience  Always have a goal and purpose in mind  Create and execute a long term plan for how this information will be utilized  Set a calendar for the assessment process (annual, bi-annual, etc.)  Keep the positive frame  Create and maintain transparency Recommendations

 Set a long range schedule for assessment execution, e.g.: CAS assessment -> action plan -> IACS review -> data collection -> review effectiveness of action -> external CAS review -> adjust approach or elements of the program -> data collection to evaluate results Recommendations, cont’d.

IACS Reference Links

Questions?? Thank you!!!