1. “Are We Missing the Mark?” WELCOME Bill Lefevers Western Piedmont Community College

2. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Purpose - Fifth-Year Interim Report Background - Overview of Report Elements - Findings of the 2013 & 2014 Schools (150) - Suggestions for Improving Reports

3. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Background - SACS implemented a Fifth-Year Interim Report effective in 2007 - - Response to the Dept. of Education’s concern that 10 years between reaccreditation activities was too long - During March/May 2008, 2013 Track A/B institutions tasked to submit a Fifth-Year Interim Report by 10/15/2008 & 3/15/2009 - During March/May 2009, 2014 Track A/B institutions tasked to submit a Fifth-Year Interim Report by 10/15/2009 & 3/15/2010 - 2013 & 2014 results at Summer Institute (July 2010)

4. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Fifth-Year Interim Report Elements I. Signatures attesting to integrity II.Abbreviated Institutional Summary Form History/Characteristics List of Degrees Locations/Distance Education III.Fifth-Year Compliance Certification 7 X SACS Core Requirements/Comprehensive Standards 7 X Federal Requirements IV. Additional Report (as needed) V. QEP Impact Report

5. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Our Focus - Part III. Fifth-Year Compliance Certification 1. CR 2.8 Number of full-time faculty 2. CR 2.10 Student support programs 3. CS 3.2.8 Qualified administrators and academic officers 4. CS 3.3.1.1 Educational programs/student learning 5. CS 3.4.3 Admissions policies 6. CS 3.4.11 Qualified academic coordinators 7. CS 3.11.3 Physical facilities 8. FR 4.1 Student achievement 9. FR 4.2 Program curriculum 10. FR 4.3 Publication of policies 11. FR 4.4 Program length 12. FR 4.5 Student complaints 13. FR 4.6 Recruitment materials 14. FR 4.7 Title IV program responsibilities and CS 3.10.3 Financial audits

6. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Results Snapshot -78% of the 76, 2013 institutions had one or more findings (59) - 93% of the 74, 2014 institutions had one or more findings (69)

7. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Results: 2013 Cohort of Institutions (76) - 17 with no monitoring - 16 with one standard cited - 29 with two/three standards cited - 7 with four/five standards cited - 5 with six/nine standards cited - 2 with ten or more standards cited

8. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Results: 2014 Cohort of Institutions (74) - 5 with no monitoring - 9 with one standard cited - 39 with two/three standards cited - 17 with four/five standards cited - 3 with six/nine standards cited - 1 with ten or more standards cited

9. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Most Cited Standards from 2013 and 2014 Cohorts - CS 3.3.1.1Institutional Effectiveness (60%) - FR 4.5Student Complaints (48%) - CR 2.8Number of FT Faculty (45%) - CS 3.4.11Qualified Academic Coordination (33%) - FR 4.4Program Length (30%) - CR 2.10Student Support Services (17%) - CS 3.11.3Physical Facilities (16%) - FR 4.7Title IV Responsibilities/Audits (12%) - FR 4.3Publication of Policies (10%)

10. “Are We Missing the Mark?” What Can We Do to Improve? - Continuously update comprehensive compliance certification - Incorporate review of all programs - Provide narrative that supports compliance & explains documents - Provide definitive documentation & direct examples (not process) - Provide a sampling, where appropriate - Use tables effectively

11. “Are We Missing the Mark?” What Can We Do to Improve? (Continued) - Link narrative with documentation - Respond to standard referenced - Include policies & examples of implementation, appropriate - Refer to Handbook for Institutions Seeking Reaffirmation of Accreditation -Indicating “We are in compliance” is not beneficial to institution when no other comments/documentation are provided

12. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Presentation of Report - Encourage the electronic mode of delivery -Print AND electronic copy of same material is confusing to the reader if there is no explanation - Ensure that the report is user friendly - Report should be self contained

13. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Presentation of Report (continued) -Reread before submission, eliminate text and documents not relevant to the issue - Follow directions -If report is electronic, suggest you submit to external party for review of ease of navigation - Limit QEP to 10 pages

14. “Are We Missing the Mark?” Presentation of Report (continued) -Consider the use of a third-party delivery platform, so that you can concentrate more on the report’s content and less on the medium. - - Western Piedmont Community College was one of the five college’s in the 2014 cohort with no monitoring and we used the third-party platform – Compliance Assist!

15. WPCC’s Compliance Assist Welcome Page

16. WPCC’s Compliance Assist Log In

17. WPCC’s Fifth-Year Interim Report Recapitulation

21. TOOLS - Shared Folder: \\loc\FifthYear\Fifth year Interim Report/\\loc\FifthYear\Fifth year Interim Report/ - “WPCC Fifth Year Report” group in GroupWise

22. SACS guidelines for electronic submission:  HTML or PDF format  Password protected  Easy access to information  Simple design and easy navigation  Step-by-step guide WPCC’s Fifth-Year Interim Report Recapitulation

23. Commercial Platform - Compliance Assist Features  Customized Branded with your schools colors, logos, images  Hosted Commercial grade platform and password protected  Assistance Faculty and course data imported for you  Track progress Assign requirements to team members with due dates WPCC’s Fifth-Year Interim Report Recapitulation

24. “Are We Missing the Mark?” QUESTIONS? Thank You for Your Attention Please review the.pdf “Luthman-2014A Summary” on your Conference “Tool Box” CD for more extensive coverage and guidance on specific findings.