1. Accreditation Pathway
January 11, 2018

2. Accreditation History
Candidacy 8/6/93
Accredited 8/8/97 (PEAQ)
AQIP Admission 9/4/08
Reaffirmation (AQIP) 12/19/12
Moved to Standard Pathway 2/2/17
Focused Visit Accepted 8/1/17
Assurance File Lock Date 3/30/20
Next Reaffirmation Spring 2020

3. Standard Pathway Overview
The Standard Pathway is one of three options institutions have for maintaining accreditation with HLC.
Follows a 10-year cycle and, like all pathways, is focused on quality assurance and institutional improvement.
HLC provides additional support for institutions on the Standard Pathway.
All institutions eligible to choose a pathway may participate in the Standard Pathway. Institutions may also be placed on the Standard Pathway if they meet certain conditions at the time of pathway determination.

4. Standard Pathway
An institution on the Standard Pathway shall demonstrate institutional improvement through an approach integrated with and focused on the Criteria for Accreditation. In addition, the institution shall demonstrate that it has made reasonable progress in resolving any concerns resulting from the previous comprehensive evaluation or raised by the Commission during the period between evaluations.
Source: HLC

5. Standard Pathway Cycle
Within the 10-year cycle, institutions on the Standard Pathway write two Assurance Arguments and undergo two Comprehensive Reviews in addition to the regular monitoring that occurs through HLC’s Institutional Update, substantive change requests, interim monitoring and other processes. 

6. Years 1-3 Prepare Assurance Filing
Institutions may contribute documents to Evidence File and begin writing Assurance Argument for Year 4 comprehensive evaluation.

7. Year 4- Comprehensive Evaluation
Institutions submit comprehensive evaluation materials.
Peer Review Team conducts comprehensive evaluation (with visit).
HLC Decision Making- Take action on comprehensive evaluation.

8. Years 5-9 Prepare Assurance Filing
Institutions may contribute documents to Evidence File and begin writing Assurance Argument for Year 10 comprehensive evaluation.

9. Assurance Filing Assurance Argument Evidence File
Federal Compliance Requirements
Any addenda required by the evaluation team or Commission staff is prepared

10. Assurance Argument
In 40,000 words or less, the Assurance Argument demonstrates how we meet each Criterion and Core Component. For each Criterion, the institution offers:
An articulation of how each Core Component within the Criterion is met.
A summary statement regarding any additional ways in which the institution fulfills the Criterion that are not otherwise covered in the statements on the Core Components.
Links to materials in the institution’s Evidence File for each claim or argument made.

11. Evidence File
Includes materials linked in the Assurance Argument to further support the narrative for each Criterion and Core Component. Examples of such evidence include:
Existing mission statements
Budget documents
Assessment and curriculum reports
Minutes from meetings of governing boards and other prominent committees
Materials submitted to and received from specialized accreditation organizations and state agencies

12. Evidence File
Most materials in the Evidence File must be uploaded directly into the system as PDF files. HLC allows institutions to provide URLs for the following specific resources:
Course catalog
Class schedules
Faculty roster
Faculty, staff and student handbooks

13. Assurance Review Steps
A team of peer reviewers evaluates the institution’s Assurance Filing. The outcome of this review is a recommendation as to whether the institution meets the Criteria for Accreditation.
An on-site visit by the peer review team is conducted.
A decision-making body reviews the institution’s documentation and the recommendation from the peer review team and takes an official action.

14. Components of a Comprehensive Evaluation
Comprehensive evaluation includes the following components:
Submission and review of institutional demonstrating compliance with HLC's Criteria for Accreditation through an Assurance Review.
Federal Compliance Review
Student Opinion Survey
On-site peer review visit

15. Evaluative Framework
In the evaluation process, the Commission will review the institution against the Criteria and Core Components.

16. Core Components The institution meets the Core Component if:
the Core Component is met without concerns, that is the institution meets or exceeds the expectations embodied in the Component; or
the Core Component is met with concerns, that is the institution demonstrates the characteristics expected by the Component, but performance in relation to some aspect of the Component must be improved.
The institution does not meet the Core Component if the institution fails to meet the Component in its entirety or is so deficient in one or more aspects of the Component that the Component is judged not to be met.

17. Criteria
The institution meets the Criterion only if all Core Components are met. The institution must be judged to meet all five Criteria for Accreditation to merit accreditation.
The Commission will grant or reaffirm accreditation (with or without conditions or sanctions), deny accreditation, or withdraw accreditation based on the outcome of this evaluation.

18. Let’s Review
Assumed Practices and Criteria

19. Assurance System
HLC grants access to the institution’s space within Assurance System to one official designee at the institution to serve as the Assurance System Coordinator. This is typically the coordinator of the institution’s accreditation efforts.
The Assurance System Coordinator may grant access to a maximum of 14 additional individuals to work within the Assurance System. The institution is responsible for granting or revoking this access; HLC does not manage the additional accounts.

20. Use of the Assurance System
Three user groups. Total users cannot exceed 15.
Coordinator: System coordinators have the ability to create and delete users, assign due dates, add evidence to the Evidence File, edit the institutional narrative, and lock the Assurance Argument for submittal. Although the institution is limited to one main Assurance System Coordinator who receives communications from HLC regarding the system, two more users may be designated at the “coordinator” level (for a total of three coordinators).
Contributor: Contributors may add evidence to the Evidence File and draft, edit and delete material from the institutional narrative.
Read-Only User: These users only have access to review the institutional narrative and Evidence File. They do not have the ability to edit, draft or delete any material.

21. Use of the Assurance System
Only one user at a time is able to edit a section of the narrative. The rest of the team will be unable to open the document until the current user has finished working on it and checks it back into the system.
The Assurance System includes an activity log that maintains a history of additions, deletions or changes. This log is available to both the institution and HLC.
HLC preloads the five Criterion and all Components into the Assurance Argument section (preloaded material does not count against the maximum word allowance).
The Evidence File contains HLC documents the institution may want to reference in its narrative.
Additional forms that are required as part of a review, such as the Federal Compliance Form, are also available in Assurance System.

22. Questions?