Monthly Meeting

1
Compliance Certification Committee
Monthly Meeting Compliance Certification Phase II
November 14, 2006 730-830 Small Dining Room
2
Agenda for November 14, 2006

• Opening Prayer
• Review Approval of Minutes
• Comments by Co-chairs
• Discussion Items
• The working outline for a compliance report
• Thoughts about building an affirmative case
• Marriage Matrix
• Changes forthcoming to the Principles of
  Accreditation
• Next Meeting

3
Co-chair Comments

• Goal today is
• Move forward from the Compliance Audit to the
  Compliance Certification
• Outlining the elements of the compliance
  certification
• Role for program owners/directors
• Committee as facilitators
• Review the Marriage Matrix
• To complete the meeting by 830

4
Discussion Items

• Compliance Certification Outline
• Verbatim statement of the principle
• Judgment of Compliance
• Narrative
• Supporting Documents

5
Compliance Certification

• Core Requirement
• 2.1 The institution has degree-granting
  authority from the appropriate government agency
  or agencies. (Degree Granting Authority)
• Judgment of Compliance
• ? Compliance ? Partial Compliance ?
  Non-compliance
• Narrative Concordia University at Austin has
  degree-granting authority from the State of
  Texas.
• The narrative should address the relevant
  questions presented in the Resource Manual (Green
  Book)
• What agencies have authorized CUA to grant
  degrees? When was authorization first or most
  recently approaved? Are there any conditional
  approvals? If degrees offered in multiple states
  or internationally, what is the evidence of
  multiple authorizations by states or countries?
• The evidence should consider, as a minimum, the
  suggested sample documentation.

6
Compliance Certification

• Thoughts
• Compliance in all 12 Core Requirements is an
  assumed condition
• While we have the option of making a judgment of
  partial compliance, the off-site committee has
  only two choices
• Compliance or Non-compliancefor those areas that
  we make the judgment of partial compliance, they
  will attempt to discern if the strengths justify
  compliance, or they will refer the item to the
  on-site committee for further determination just
  as they would for an area they deem non-compliant
• The entering argument in the narrative sets the
  tone, and affirmative arguments should be
  presented at the front end of the narrative.
  OWNER/DIRECTOR INVOLVEMENT IN BUILDING THE
  AFFIRMATIVE CASE IS CRUCIAL
• As committee members, you can facilitate this
  process with the Rationale Notes, Relevant
  Questions for Consideration, and Sample
  Documentation portions of the Resource Manual

7
Marriage Matrix

• Load Excel Spreadsheet
• Load SACS changes

(insert hyperlink to the Excel MM)(provide hard
copies to committee members)(include SACS
changes on the CD for ref)
8
Closing Discussion

• Establish a collaborative relationship with
  owners and directors, providing them with a
  working outline based on Resource Manual
• Jointly develop a topical outline of each element
  and a starting list of supporting documentation
  for the Compliance Certification by December 2006
• Feed them the requirementsGreen book is a good
  starting point
• You, playing the Devils Advocate, is important
  
• Feedback to the owners where shortfalls exist or
  delays occur
• First Draft of the Compliance Narratives by
  March 2007

9
Closing Discussion

• Significant Changes in the Requirements
• Revised section 1 on Institutional Integrity
• Clarification differentiation on CR 2.5, and CS
  3.3.1, 3.4.1, and 3.5.1 dealing with Inst Eff
• Modified CR 2.11 on Resources into two parts, one
  for financial resources and the other for
  physical resources
• Clarified expecatations associated with 3.7.1
  dealing with faculty credentials
• Plenty of other minor changes throughout
• Will be presented to the Delegate Assembly at the
  Dec 2006 SACS meeting

10
Thank you for caring