Accreditation Actions

The following are actions that may be taken by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (ACCJC/WASC).

Actions That Reaffirm Accreditation

• Reaffirm accreditation The institution substantially meets or exceeds accreditation standards, eligibility requirements, and policies. Recommendations are directed at strengthening the institution, not correcting situations where the institution fails to meet the standards, eligibility requirements, and policies. The institution is required to submit a Midterm Report in the third year of the six-year accreditation cycle.
• Reaffirm accreditation, and request a focused midterm report The institution substantially meets or exceeds accreditation standards, eligibility requirements, and policies, but the Commission wishes to direct the institution’s attention to a small number of recommendations for special emphasis. The Commission will specify the nature, purpose, and scope of the focus of this report. The institution is required to submit a Focused Midterm Report in the third year of the six-year accreditation cycle.
• Reaffirm accreditation, and request a focused midterm report with a visit The institution substantially meets or exceeds accreditation standards, eligibility requirements, and policies, but the Commission wishes to direct the institution’s attention to a small number of recommendations for special emphasis. The Commission will specify the nature, purpose, and scope of the focus of this report and the visit to be made. The institution is required to submit a Focused Midterm Report in the third year of the six-year accreditation cycle.
• Reaffirm accreditation, and request a progress report The institution substantially meets or exceeds accreditation standards, eligibility requirements, and policies, but has recommendations on a small number of issues of some urgency which, if not addressed immediately, may threaten the ability of the institution to meet accreditation standards, eligibility requirements, and policies. The Commission will specify the issues to be addressed and the due date of the report. Resolution of the issues is expected within a one-to-two year period. The institution is also required to submit a Midterm Report in the third year of the six-year accreditation cycle.
• Reaffirm accreditation, and request a progress report with a visit The institution substantially meets or exceeds accreditation standards, eligibility requirements, and policies, but has recommendations on a small number of issues of some urgency which, if not addressed immediately, may threaten the ability of the institution to meet accreditation standards, eligibility requirements, and policies. The Commission will specify the issues to be addressed and the due date of the report to be submitted, and specifics of the visit to be made. Resolution of the issues is expected within a one-to-two year period. The institution is also required to submit a Midterm Report in the third year of the six-year accreditation cycle.

Procedural Actions

• Defer a decision on reaffirmation of accreditation A commission decision on accreditation is postponed pending receipt of specified additional information from the institution or to permit an institution to correct serious weaknesses and report to the Commission within six months or less. The response from the institution may be followed by a visit addressed primarily to the reasons for the decision. The Commission will specify the nature, purpose, and scope of the information to be submitted and the visit to be made. The accredited status of the institution continues during the period of deferment.

Actions that Impose Sanctions

The Accrediting Commission is required by the U.S. Department of Education not to allow deficiencies to exist for more than a total of two years. Consequently, institutions may remain under sanction for a cumulative total of no more than two years. If concerns are not resolved within this period, the Commission will take action to terminate accreditation.

• Issue Warning When the Accrediting Commission finds that an institution has pursued a course deviating from the Commission’s eligibility requirements, standards, or policies to an extent that gives concern to the Commission, it may issue a warning to the institution to correct its deficiencies, refrain from certain activities, or initiate certain activities. The Commission will specify the time within which the college must resolve deficiencies. During the warning period, the institution will be subject to reports and visits at a frequency to be determined by the Commission. The accredited status of the institution continues during the warning period; if probation is imposed as a result of the institution’s comprehensive review, reaffirmation is delayed during the period of warning.
• Impose Probation When an institution deviates significantly from the Commission’s eligibility requirements, standards, or policies, but not to such an extent as to warrant a show cause order or the termination of candidacy or accreditation, or fails to respond to conditions imposed upon by the Commission, including a warning, the institution may be placed on probation. The Commission will specify the time within which the college must resolve deficiencies. During the probation period, the institution will be subject to reports and visits at a frequency to be determined by the Commission. The accredited status of the institution continues during the probation period; if probation is imposed as a result of the institution’s comprehensive review, reaffirmation is delayed during the period of probation.
• Order to Show Cause When the Accrediting Commission finds an institution to be in substantial non-compliance with its eligibility requirements, standards, or policies, or when the institution has not responded to the conditions imposed by the Commission, the Commission may require the institution to show cause why its accreditation should not be withdrawn at the end of a stated period. In such cases, the burden of proof will rest on the institution to demonstrate why its accreditation should be continued. The Commission will specify the time within which the institution must resolve deficiencies. While under a show cause order, the institution will be subject to reports and visits at a frequency to be determined by the Commission. The accredited status of the institution continues during the show cause period; if show cause is ordered as a result of the institution’s comprehensive review, reaffirmation is delayed during the show cause order.

Actions that Terminate Accreditation

• Termination of Accreditation If, in the judgment of the Accrediting Commission, an institution has not satisfactorily explained or corrected matters of which it has been given notice, or has taken an action that has placed it significantly out of compliance with Commission standards, its accreditation may be terminated. The Commission will give the institution written reasons for its decision. Termination of accreditation is subject to a request for review and appeal under the applicable policies and procedures of the Commission and the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. The accreditation status of the institution continues pending completion of any review and appeal process the institution may request. Otherwise, the institution’s accreditation ends on the date when the time period permitting such a request expires.