Skip to main content

Communication Protocols for Accredited Programs

Guidance for Coordinating Programmatic Accreditation Reviews

The Office of Accreditation and Assessment provides guidance and resources to support departments through the external review process for accredited, licensed, or state-certified programs. The following process outlines communication process programs should have with the Provost office regarding programmatic accreditation. Each section is intended for each possible stage of programmatic accreditation. Programs are highly encouraged to use consultants to review the self-study report draft, prepare for the site visit, or provide general advice on the accreditation process.

Planning Timeline Worksheet

Programs are required to submit a timeline 360 days in advance of the self-study submission deadline that outlines key milestones for document development, consultant coordination, and site visit preparation. This worksheet helps departments plan and track those steps in alignment with ADHE and institutional expectations.

? Attached Document: Programmatic Accreditation Timeline Worksheet (DOCX)

Use this worksheet to:

  • Identify your self-study and site visit dates
  • Plan committee formation and document submission
  • Schedule meetings with the Provost’s Office
  • Track rejoinders, final reports, and progress updates

Candidacy and Initial Accreditation

  1. Curriculum Forms for new programs and reconfigured programs includes information regarding the timeline for candidacy and initial accreditation.
  2. Programs will submit a timeline 360 days in advance of the self-study submission deadline that outlines the milestones for developing and submitting all documents and self-study reports to the accreditor, Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation (see Planning Timeline Worksheet).
  3. The following applications, forms, and/or reports must be submitted to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation at least 30 days in advance of submission to programmatic accreditor:
    1. All candidacy and initial accreditation applications (after program/curriculum proposal forms are approved)
    2. Initial accreditation self-study or log-in to assurance argument system
    3. A two-page summary of the strengths and potential concerns of the program based on the self-study analysis and report
  4. Within 30 days of the site visit, the self-study director, program director, department chair, associate dean, and dean will meet with the Provost and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation to review the accreditation process. This meeting should include a short presentation with the following information: review of accreditation process, expectations for the site visit, self-study highlights, strengths and potential concerns, and anticipated questions during the visit.
  5. Site visit agenda must be provided to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation at least 14 days prior to site team arrival and must include the following:
    1. At least one meeting, preferably the exit meeting, with the Provost and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation
    2. In the event the Provost or Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation cannot attend the meeting, the Sr. Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs will attend
  6. Any rejoinder or confirmation of fact correspondence after the site visit must be submitted to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation within 14 days of the deadline set by the accreditor.
  7. All email correspondence between accreditor and program after the site visit and before the final accreditor decision regarding rejoinder and/or confirmation of fact must include the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation
  8. Team report, team recommendations, and accreditation affirmation letters must be sent to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation within 14 days of receipt

Reaffirmation of Accreditation

  1. Programs will submit a timeline 360 days in advance of the self-study submission deadline that outlines the milestones for developing and submitting all documents and self-study reports to the accreditor, Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation (template will be provided).
  2. The following must be submitted to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation at least 30 days in advance of submission to programmatic accreditor:
    1. Accreditation self-study or log-in to assurance argument system
    2. A two-page summary of the strengths and potential concerns of the program based on the self-study analysis and report
  3. Within 30 days of the site visit, the self-study director, program director, department chair, associate dean, and dean will meet with the Provost and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation to review the accreditation process. This meeting should include a short presentation with the following information: review of accreditation process, expectations for the site visit, self-study highlights, strengths and potential concerns, and anticipated questions during the visit.
  4. Site visit agenda must be provided to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation at least 14 days prior to site team arrival and must include the following:
    1. At least one meeting, preferably the exit meeting, with the Provost and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation
    2. In the event the Provost or ASSISSTANT VICE CHANCELLOR for Assessment and Accreditation cannot attend the meeting, the Sr. Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs will attend
  5. Any rejoinder or confirmation of fact correspondence after the site visit must be submitted to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation within two weeks of the deadline set by the accreditor.
  6. All email correspondence between accreditor and program after the site visit and before the final accreditor decision regarding rejoinder and/or confirmation of fact must include the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation
  7. Team report, team recommendations, and accreditation reaffirmation letters must be sent to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation within 14 days of receipt

Post Hoc Process: Interim Monitoring1

  1. In the event the programmatic accreditor requires interim monitoring of any type (report or focus visit), the following must be delivered to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation at least 30 days in advance of the programmatic accreditor’s deadline:
    1. Interim report or log-in to assurance argument system
    2. A two-page summary of the strengths and potential concerns of the program based on the follow-up improvements required for the interim report
  2. If there is a focus visit, the site visit agenda must be provided to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation at least 14 days prior to site team arrival and must include the following:
    1. At least one meeting, preferably the exit meeting, with the Provost and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation
    2. In the event the Provost or Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation cannot attend the meeting, the Sr. Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs will attend
  3. Interim report or site visit review letters must be sent to the Provost, Provost’s Executive Assistant, and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation within two weeks of receipt

1 Programmatic accreditation nomenclature varies from accreditor-to-accreditor. In some instances, particularly in health professions and public administration, the accreditor requires annual routine reports that are called “interim reports.” These types of routine interim reports are not subject to AAR review as discussed here. Interim monitoring in this context is related to addressing deficiencies in meeting the accreditor’s standards or criterion. Additionally, some accreditors require clinical site endorsements. This, too, is an exception to the formal communication process outlined in this document. The Provost and AAR are always willing to assist when needed with these types of reports and endorsements though. Please keep in close contact with the respective Dean and reach out to AAR for assistance when needed.

Post Hoc Process: Recommendations for Next Reaffirmation

  1. In the event the programmatic accreditor makes recommendations for the next reaffirmation, programs are required to make a progress report to the Provost and Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation one year from receipt of the team report and official accreditation letter.
    1. If curriculum is mentioned, the Sr. Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs should be contacted immediately to begin the curriculum revision process and necessary proposals
    2. If retention is mentioned, the Associate Vice Chancellor for Student Retention should be consulted
    3. If student-learning assessment is mentioned, the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Assessment and Accreditation should be consulted and assessment plans adapted to the accreditor’s recommendations
    4. If hiring new faculty and/or staff is recommended, the Dean and Provost should begin making the necessary hiring arrangements
    5. All other possible recommendations should be discussed with the appropriate department (i.e. Facilities Management; internship sites; preceptors; etc.)

Notes

This communication process may be altered to fit the accreditor’s processes when appropriate. However, the Provost Office must have clear communication and a reasonable amount of time to review self-study reports, rejoinder or confirmation of fact correspondence, interim monitoring reports, and/or site visit meeting requests.

Back to top