Your Accreditation Mentor (YAM)

WHAT DO WE MEAN BY 'QUALITY?'

There are two aspects of "quality" in the world of accreditation. Or, you might say, there are two kinds of answers to the fundamental accreditation question: How good is this educational program?

First, there is the seal-of-approval aspect. When you claim (and, of course, appropriately receive acclaim) that your program is accredited, you demonstrate to students, parents, counselors and others that your program is "in the zone" of programs that meet national standards. In some professions, students may only be able to proceed from your program to their next step of taking required examinations if your program is "in the zone." So that seal of approval is mighty important to students and to you.

Second, there is the progressive aspect. Quality equals meeting national standards, of course, and then exceeding them. Quality is stepping beyond a minimum (the Standards) and doing even better. Quality is being even better this year than you were last year -- and figuring out how to be better yet next year. It's this approach that explains why leaders in accreditation often explain accreditation in terms of "continuous quality improvement."

The accreditation process exists to assure that all professional programs (if accredited) meet a minimum. But the accreditation process also serves to assure that you will have the data you'll need to show progress year-to-year.

Is yours a quality program? You absolutely want to have an "accredited" seal of approval, to say to any and all that your program is "in the zone" of the nation's quality programs; you meet all the standards.

But why settle for that? You are urged -- by students, by employers, by your colleagues perhaps, by your advisory board, and by your own inner compass as a professional educator -- to always strive to exceed the current standards. Someone's program will be the quality leader. If not today, someday that may be yours.

Read how the Council on Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) describes accreditation's two views of 'Quality.'

WHO CARES, AND WHY?

THE PUBLIC'S STAKE IN ACCREDITATION

Education programs serve the public interest as well as the interest of those who create and maintain them. Capable and successful students who master a quality course of study are likely to become capable and successful practitioners; some will go on to be leaders in their chosen professions; some will go on to become educators in these professions. Accreditation is one instrument by which the society at large maintains and, over time, improves and modernizes health services.

Accreditation serves as one highly-regarded indicator of educational quality; your program's accreditation status not only provides a quick indicator to anyone in search of a quality program, but it assures the public that a third party is carefully watching over educational practices.

Historically, accreditation Standards are published. All the CAAHEP Standards can be found on the CAAHEP website. When new or revised Standards are under discussion, these are publicly available and sometimes members of the public will comment or testify.

But the most frequently sought information, by the public, is whether (or not) a program is accredited. Historically, that fact -- that your program is accredited -- is the only information that is made public from the accreditation process. Otherwise, confidentiality protects the process. The list of all currently CAAHEP-accredited programs is found on the CAAHEP website. Checking to find accredited programs, or to assure that a program is accredited, is the most frequent use by the public at large of the CAAHEP website. The list on the CAAHEP website of accredited programs is consulted tens-of-thousands of times each year. [Also, annually, the American Medical Association publishes The Health Care Careers Directory which catalogs accredited education programs in all health care professions.]

While it is true that, historically, and for the most part still today, complete confidentiality is an operating principle of your program's accreditation, you should know that trends in recent decades toward openness and consumer protection have, in some places, by state law or institutional custom, made some documents from the inner workings of the accreditation process available upon request. You should be aware of what public disclosure, if any, is required in your particular state and institution. Ask officials of your school, consult your institution's policies, or ask your Committee on Accreditation (CoA).

YOUR STUDENTS' STAKE IN ACCREDITATION

Making the transition from your educational program into the workforce - getting a job -- is the practical goal of most of your students.

In some professions, graduating from an accredited program is a requirement. In others, it is merely wise, since employers and others may frown upon job candidates from non-accredited programs. Also, graduating from an accredited program supports a practitioner's mobility from one state to another in the United States, because the requirements for employment vary from state to state. A student who graduates from a non-accredited program may be able to find work in the state where the education program exists; but, too often practitioners are shocked to find that other states will not accept their credentials because those states require graduation from an accredited program.

Accreditation is an assurance, to beginning students, that the course of study and learning experience they are about to participate in have been reviewed by a third party who assures that Standards for education in their chosen profession have been met.

When students enter an accredited program and find, to their dismay, that the program is not living up to those Standards, they have the opportunity to file complaints with the CoA for their profession and with CAAHEP. Generally, student complaints are reviewed by and may be investigated by the appropriate CoA, and complaints can be a factor in recommendations that a CoA makes to CAAHEP about a program's accreditation status.

The good news is, most accredited programs do their job well and generate few if any student complaints.

PROFESSIONS' STAKE IN ACCREDITATION

Professions are motivated to assure that the next generation of practitioners is well-educated. It reflects poorly on any profession's public credibility and trust, and every working professional's public credibility and trust, when bad things happen and are publicized that can be traced to poorly trained staff.

Also, competently trained individuals may require less on-the-job training.

In so many health care institutions, the spectre of public scandal and the burden of malpractice lawsuits hang in the air. It makes sense for organized professions to strive to reduce the likelihood and frequency of these events by insisting upon quality education for new employees.

These reasons explain why working professionals often volunteer to participate in the accreditation process, and to serve on advisory boards and in other roles within educational programs. And these reasons explain why, historically and today, professions have led the effort to create accrediting bodies and to support them through fees and through representation in the leadership.

Read how the Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) describes the importance of accreditation.

Read testimonials to the importance of accreditation .

ACCREDITATION WORKS BECAUSE OF A PROCESS

There are more than 17,000 accredited educational programs in the United States, including 2000 programs under the CAAHEP umbrella. [Obviously, you are not alone in this accreditation activity; and you are not being singled out. It's part and parcel of being an educator.]

To support this volume of activity, and to do so with fairness to all, there must be a process that organizes steps that each program needs to follow. The process as it applies to your program will be found, in all its detail, on the website of your Committee on Accreditation (CoA). But it wouldn't be very different in any other profession than it will be for you. After 100+ years of accreditation in American higher education, the process is nearly the same across the spectrum of American professions; details vary, but not the essence of the process.

The process not only enables you to know what to do; it also allows you to know what actions at each step along the way you can expect that your CoA, and CAAHEP, will take.

In these times of digital communications, details of the process sometimes are changed in order to increase efficiency. So, please, check the website of your CoA from time to time, just to be sure that you are aware of changes in the details that may have been introduced.

When you start into the process, you will find that there are timelines to meet, forms to file, fees to pay, meeting dates and deadlines to be aware of, and more.

All this is explained in the materials from your CoA and on the website of your CoA. Read it; if you're confused, ask questions! (Down the road, you won't want to experience delays or snafus because you missed a step or a deadline.)

There is a vocabulary for accreditation that you'll soon get to know as second nature. You'll talk about "site visits," "self-studies," "visiting teams," "employer surveys," "annual reports," and much more. These terms are all discussed elsewhere in YAM and in the materials from CAAHEP and from your CoA.

Before you master these words, please understand that they describe discrete steps in the process, but don't lose sight of the whole: Accreditation is best understood as a continuous process of evidence-gathering, analysis, reporting, review and critiquing, and responses; the process never stops, whether you are working on a site visit, an annual report, or other bits of the process. Here's how that process flows:

EVIDENCE-GATHERING. You gather a variety of required data, information and documents.

ANALYSIS. You analyze all these data, information and documents in a prescribed manner, asking of yourself whether your program meets each and all of the Standards established for your profession.

REPORTING. You report your data and your analysis, in writing, at the established times, to your CoA.

REVIEW. Your CoA reviews your data and your analysis and makes its own judgments (based on the evidence you have provided, and periodically, on the basis of a visit to your program) about whether your program meets standards.

RESPONSE. You receive feedback from your CoA. If changes to your program are needed, time is allotted and you will submit updated reports. And, at the appointed times, in the CAAHEP process, your CoA makes recommendations to CAAHEP about your program's accreditation status.

STATUS. CAAHEP reviews the recommendations it receives and, subject to its own rules and procedures, grants your accreditation status.

CONTINUATION. Accreditation is ongoing, so every year you will gather more evidence, analyze, report to your CoA, get responses, etc., and, periodically, you will experience another visit.

In a few cases, there may be additional steps. Built into the process are appeals opportunities, for example. To the credit of the process and to the hard work of the CoA's, these steps rarely are needed.

---

If you're just getting started with accreditation, you won't need to think about other aspects of the process, although you certainly may check them out on the CAAHEP and CoA websites:

For example, there is an elaborate process for how Standards may be changed that involves proposals, reviews, public hearings, and if changes are made, a timetable for implementation.

Another example: Your CoA also will have a process for selecting the individuals who may visit your program on site. In due time, you may want to be a site visitor.

Similarly, there are processes by which CAAHEP functions, and one day you may wish to be part of the overarching organization.

But as you begin your involvement with accreditation, focus on the flow of activity described here, and on the details of the process as prescribed by your CoA. The details are important, of course. But don't get so focused on the steps that you forget what accreditation is all about: Ultimately, it's all about a process that that leads you and others to answer the fundamental question: How good is this educational program?

STANDARDS and GUIDELINES

On the CAAHEP website you will find a document for your profession that is named “Standards and Guidelines.” Almost everything you do relates to this document; become familiar with it.

WHAT IS A 'STANDARD?'

In practical terms, any "standard" is a rule; it's a requirement; it's a hurdle; it's a principle.

In the larger American context, "freedom of speech," protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, is a famous example of a standard.

The language of a standard is not, generally, extremely precise; standards allow for judgments to be made. We have spent centuries in the United States making judgments about whether we meet the "freedom of speech" standard, for example.

In the CAAHEP context, quality educational programs meet or exceed a collection of standards (often called "The Standards" or "The CAAHEP Standards") for educational programs in a profession.

---

In the CAAHEP environment, the Standards are expressions of desirable traits that have been proposed, discussed, and sometimes revised many times before they are the "official" statements. Members of professions, educators, program directors and others have reviewed them and debated them. Public hearings have been held.

So, the Standards can, and periodically do change, but change happens only slowly, deliberately, and with major effort. Standards are, as close as humanly possible, statements of consensus about quality in educational programs.

Over periods of years and decades, consensus may shift, professions may change in ways that suggest educational change, and Standards will keep up. But, for your purposes, it is best to treat the current Standards as givens.

---

When it comes time for you to analyze the success of your own program at meeting Standards, you will find that the best way to assure that everyone understands you have met any Standard is to exceed it.

WHAT IS A “GUIDELINE?”

In practical terms, a Guideline is good advice about meeting a Standard; it's a reflection of broad consensus about good practice; it's a statement of conventional wisdom. A Guideline is not a rule, requirement, hurdle or principle.

Guidelines express hard-fought wisdom that you definitely should consider. But -- and this is important -- innovation almost always challenges conventional wisdom. If you have an opportunity to sidestep that wisdom and do something better, you will probably have to explain how your choice helps to achieve the Standard, but your program isn't judged on its adherence to a Guideline. Your program can only be judged on its relationship to a Standard.

Guidelines are written through the same process as Standards. Like Standards, they change over time.

Read the Guidelines; think about them; follow them when you don't have a better idea. But concentrate on Standards.

MEASURES OF QUALITY: “OUTCOMES” and “INPUTS,” as found in Standards and Guidelines

There was a time in American education, perhaps 50 or more years ago, when the only standard measure of an educational program's quality was a list of a program's characteristics: the ratio of students to faculty members, the size of laboratories, the contents of libraries, and such.

That viewpoint began to change throughout the arena of accreditation, in the 1960s.

In today's language, these kinds of "what we've got" characteristics are referred to as "inputs."

The conventional wisdom behind the practice of judging quality based on inputs was, of course, two-fold:

Inputs were easy to observe or measure or count.

Inputs were believed to be highly correlated with educational success.

It has taken decades of experience and debate for a sea-change to occur in accreditation: attention to inputs has radically decreased while attention to educational outcomes has greatly increased!

---

In the contemporary view ("The Outcomes Approach" as you will hear people say) -- adopted by CAAHEP more than a decade ago -- educational success is the most important measure of an educational program.

In operation, CAAHEP-accredited educational programs are judged primarily on outcomes.

Most CAAHEP Standards are expressed in terms of outcomes -- as exemplified by such things as Certification and licensure test results, employment rates, employer satisfaction, and success by graduates when they start to practice their profession.

These kinds of “output” data -- which are quite different from “inputs” such as student/faculty ratios or the content of library shelves -- are the measures that Committees on Accreditation (CoAs) need you to gather, think about, analyze and report.

Inputs, often, are the content of Guidelines. Inputs still are regarded by educators as linked -- if not always highly correlated -- to educational success. Inputs are what you use to achieve outcomes.

You will need to think about inputs; you may have to discuss the adequacy of your inputs if outcomes fall short; but your program will be analyzed by you and judged by your CoA on standards about its outcomes.

[VIDEO LINK FROM THIS PAGE. Link will bring up Video #20]

Click here for a brief review by Gary Lees about possible outcome measures.

DOMAINS OF LEARNING: Cognitive, Psychomotor, Affective - words in Standards about Curriculum

[You can take graduate education courses in learning theory to explore the subject treated here in just a few paragraphs, so please excuse some oversimplication:]

To deal with some of the CAAHEP Standards, here are four concepts and terms you'll need to understand:

Educators often discuss learning as a composite of three kinds of behavior on the part of a learner, called "Learning Domains" or “Domains of Learning.”

Standards and Guidelines about curriculum outcomes (the content of what you teach to students, and the results you want to have some measures of) are expressed in these three words:

• Cognitive (cognition; what you know, factually speaking, and can discuss matter-of-factly; professional knowledge such as human anatomy; the stuff of textbooks);
• Psychomotor (what your body can do with what your mind knows, such as drawing blood, moving a patient, etc.; the stuff of professional skill; things rarely learned without demonstration, coaching and practice);
• Affective (affect; the emotions or feelings of being a professional -- such as desire to keep learning, compassion for the sick, respect for fellow workers and employers).

Educators in the health care professions presume to be able to change all these things in their students; and, within reason, educators strive to observe or measure these things.

---

Let's say this again, in words about your program:

Your program is designed to impact students' learning. And learning is well understood to be three kinds of behavior:

• Cognitive: What students didn't know at the beginning that your graduates can spout accurately in their sleep.
• Psychomotor: What students couldn't do at the beginning that your graduates now can do well.
• Affective: The attitudes and convictions in their professional demeanor that students didn't have at the beginning that your graduates express and display.

In accreditation -- and, therefore, in the planning for your educational program -- you want to impact students in all 3 domains of learning; and you want to collect data that reflects all three kinds of outcomes.

INITIAL AND CONTINUING ACCREDITATION

INITIAL

If your program has never received an accreditation status, you will be seeking your first or "initial" accreditation. You will be asked to perform many tasks leading to a report you submit, a visit by other educators to your site, and perhaps other follow-up tasks. (Get the details for your program from your Committee on Accreditation (CoA).

When you achieve accreditation, it will be called "initial accreditation." There will be a time limit to this accreditation after which your program's accreditation status will expire -- unless, of course, you apply for continuing accreditation. That time limit for initial accreditation is 3 or 5 years, so be sure to know your CoA's procedure. In terms of your status in the world, initial accreditation is no different from the accreditation older programs receive: once the status of initial accreditation is received, you are accredited (until the 3-year of 5-year time period ends).

Your work for initial accreditation will not differ in major ways from all accreditation work. You will be gathering information and data, analyzing, reporting, etc. What may feel different (but isn't really) is that unfamiliar processes can feel difficult. They're not especially hard; hundreds of your peers across the country have done this successfully and so can you; it just feels uncomfortable sometimes because all of the work is new to you. Don't let anxiety get you down; every time gets easier.

For reasons that are mistaken, some people think it is poor form to ask for help. Not so! In fact, you may need more assistance this first time than you will in later years. Whenever you are concerned about something, ask.

Don't think that it's some kind of black mark that's being entered into your file someplace if you ask questions; if anything, you'll be admired for your effort to get things right. When in doubt, don't struggle; don't guess; don't assume; and, especially, don't throw in the towel; ask!

The best source of information is your CoA but there are many other sources too including deans, colleagues in your profession, and in other professions.

---

One pitfall to avoid: DO NOT advertise that your program is seeking accreditation nor when accreditation is expected.

Doing so not only violates a rule of the process, it misleads students. And it makes your program look naive.

The only permissible advertising claim comes after you become accredited; then you may advertise with pride that your program is CAAHEP accredited.

CONTINUING

The second time that you seek accreditation, you are going to be seeking and receiving "continuing accreditation" status. Continuing accreditation does not end, unless your CoA and CAAHEP have reason to withdraw it.

Your annual and periodic reporting requirements to your CoA may be somewhat different from those for programs with initial accreditation. But, as always, your CoA lays out all the procedures and requirements. Read the website. Ask questions.

PROBATIONARY

It is possible that your CoA will judge that your program has some serious deficiencies in its compliance with the Standards. In that case, the CoA may determine that your program should be recommended for probationary status.

If this happens, it means that a timetable is set by which the CoA expects the program to come back into compliance.

While probationary accreditation sometimes may be a first step to withdrawal of accreditation, this is rare. More often probationary accreditation is a formal way to express faith that a program is on its way to meeting Standards; it's not a black mark; it's an encouragement.

IS YOUR PROGRAM ACCREDITED? WITH WHAT STATUS?

[This may seem too basic to think about, and probably as a program director you know the accreditation status, but if you are new, possibly not.]

To find out what your program's accreditation status is you would be wise not to rely on someone else's memory. Your files [or perhaps a framed certificate on the wall] should contain a letter from CAAHEP informing you of accreditation status. You can be certain that your program is accredited as specified in that letter.

• If your program's status is initial accreditation, be sure to know when that status was granted and check to see when that status expires. The letter from CAAHEP should tell you.
• If your program's status is probationary, know the time limit you have to remedy deficiencies in order to qualify for continuing accreditation.

If your files don't have such a letter, check the CAAHEP website for accredited programs. Great pains are taken to keep the list of accredited programs accurate and up to date. If your program is not on the list, you can be 99.99% certain that it is not accredited.

Perhaps your program was once accredited but the status has lapsed or been withdrawn. If so, CAAHEP and your CoA will have records that can be checked.

IS ACCREDITATION VOLUNTARY?

YES…

You will see it said in some of the writings about accreditation that this is a voluntary system. It is literally true that education programs (in several professions) need not be accredited. And, once accredited, your program can opt out by voluntarily withdrawing.

…AND NO.

In the practical world, where programs compete for students, for status in their institutions, for financial resources, for quality faculty and for other valuable benefits, it has become difficult for programs to forego accreditation. In several professions, graduation from an accredited program is a requirement in order for a new practitioner to gain employment or to take state-required or profession-required exams -- which makes it necessary (even if 'voluntary') for programs to be accredited.

---

The history of accreditation, a uniquely American phenomenon (now in the early stages of being established in a few other countries) is that educators took the initiative 100 years ago or more in some professions to set up their own peer-review quality-control system. That, then, was voluntary.

In most other countries, the power to establish, evaluate and sanction education programs is controlled by territorial or national governments. In this sense, the American system is voluntary; it is not a governmental system supported by taxes but a private one offered (or required) by professions and supported by fees.

---

Because accreditation involves professional peers reviewing each others' work, it is a system heavily reliant on individuals who volunteer their time for little-or-no compensation. In this sense, it is a volunteer system, if not a voluntary one.

Your program can only benefit from accreditation. If there's any doubt, take our word for it: You should 'volunteer' your program to be accredited. [And down the road, after you've experienced the processes of accreditation for a few years, you should consider being a volunteer to help review other programs.]

[VIDEO LINK FROM THIS PAGE. Link will bring up Video #12]

Click here to hear Debra Casen briefly discuss reasons to be accredited.

ACCREDITATION WORKS BECAUSE OF A STRUCTURE

Accreditation -- the process by which educators and their peers work together to observe and to improve professional education -- would not work if it were not for hundreds of dedicated volunteers and dozens of staff members working in a complex organizational structure.

WHAT'S A COMMITTEE ON ACCREDITATION (CoA)? WHICH ONE IS YOURS?

Committees on Accreditation (CoAs), exist because professions, through their professional societies, feel the need to establish and sponsor an accreditation process.

CoAs vary in size, and they vary from each other in the details of their work, because of the number of educational programs in their field. For example, the CoA serving Medical Assistants has responsibility for 550 programs and is an organization with several staff members and dozens of volunteers nationwide; the CoA serving Medical Illustrators has responsibility for 5 programs and is an organization run by a handful of volunteers.

In the CAAHEP system, the work of accreditation in each education program (such as yours) is managed by a Committee on Accreditation (or CoA).

CoAs work within a system of Standards and within a framework of policies established by the CAAHEP Board of Directors. CoAs devise their own detailed procedures for conducting the accreditation process, and it's the CoA in your professional area that you will deal with most frequently. Eventually, when it is time for an accreditation status to be determined, the CoA will make a recommendation to CAAHEP.

CAAHEP, which receives recommendations from 16 CoAs, is the legal entity that grants accreditation status.

You probably know which is your CoA already. But if not, you can almost certainly look at the list of CoAs and from the names of each, determine which is yours. If you have any doubt, check each possible CoA's website for detailed information. If there's still any doubt, call the most likely CoA or call CAAHEP.

COMMISSION ON ACCREDITATION OF ALLIED HEALTH EDUCATION PROGRAMS (CAAHEP)

CAAHEP is an umbrella organization to which 16 CoAs belong.

CAAHEP does several important things that CoAs don't readily accomplish individually:

The most important is that CAAHEP exercises the legal responsibility to grant accreditation status.

CAAHEP is composed of a Commission that meets annually that includes all the professional societies that sponsor CoAs, all the CoAs, and some representatives of higher education and of the public. The Commission elects a Board from among its members that meets 8 times annually. It is the Board that grants accreditation status.

CAAHEP runs workshops for CoA staff and leaders to hone their skills; CAAHEP manages the Standards development process; CAAHEP represents and facilitates its member CoAs in various professional roles in the larger worlds of accreditation and Allied Health. CAAHEP provides services -- such as Your Accreditation Mentor (YAM) -- that serve many CoAs.

FEES THAT GET PAID TO CoAs AND CAAHEP

Accreditation is not supported by government; it is paid for by fees to CoAs and to CAAHEP.

The fee structure requires that educational programs subscribe to or purchase services from CoAs. Some activities of accreditation, such as site visits, also have fees that programs pay to CoAs. You'll find the fees to your CoA explained on its website.

The fee structure also requires that institutions that have CAAHEP-accredited programs pay an institutional fee annually to CAAHEP (currently $450). Additional CAAHEP support comes from dues paid by CoAs and dues paid by CoAs' sponsoring organizations.

Institutions handle their fee in various ways: Some pay it from an institutional budget; some distribute the appropriate share of the fee to the budget of each of their CAAHEP-accredited program(s). For your own peace of mind, check with your institution (or look at last year's budget) to see how this fee is handled at your institution.

It's a complex structure, but it works.

What you most need to know as a program director is that you work with one Committee on Accreditation (CoA). Your CoA facilitates your accreditation processes (and you have fees to pay there); ultimately the Standards you meet and the Accreditation status you receive come from CAAHEP (and your institution pays a fee there).

WHAT DOES CAAHEP DO THAT YOU NEED TO CARE ABOUT?

The first and most obvious thing that CAAHEP does that's meaningful to your program is that it grants accreditation status. The letter to you from CAAHEP is the proof that all has gone well and that you meet the CAAHEP Standards for education programs in your health professions area.

The second-most-obvious CAAHEP activity is the CAAHEP website. The website has many features, but the one that will matter to you most is that your program gets posted on the list of accredited programs. This happens at the same time as the CAAHEP Board acts on the accreditation of your program.

The list of accredited programs, on the website, will attest to your accreditation status to thousands of your potential students, and to other interested parties. (It is wise to check your listing to assure accuracy!)

Some potential students (or their parents, or counselors), because of the website, will discover that your program exists. So it's a prospecting tool, for your program.

Some potential students will review your program's status on the website to assure themselves that claims they've heard are accurate and that yes, indeed, your program is CAAHEP-accredited. So it is a recruiting tool.

Some of your savviest new students may go further into the website to read the Standards for education in the area your program serves. And you might urge all potential students to do so. The Standards serve as an explanation to students about the kind of education they can expect to receive from your CAAHEP-accredited program.

Also, CAAHEP publishes, both on the Web and in paper formats, a great deal of useful information. YAM is one example. Check the CAAHEP website, just so you'll know what's there when you need it.

CAAHEP does many other things in service to its CoA members and to its professional society sponsors; and through Standards-setting procedures, training efforts for CoA staff and leadership, and participation in various national organizations, as well as through special projects, CAAHEP serves to keep the accreditation process as timely, fair and professional as possible. In your first accreditation efforts, these aspects of CAAHEP's work may be invisible to you; or you'll think of them as "behind the scenes." Some program directors, as they mature in the profession, find some CAAHEP activity such as standards-setting to be of great interest.

HOW DO COMMITTEES ON ACCREDITATION (CoAs) AND CAAHEP FUNCTION TOGETHER?

CoAs are members of CAAHEP. Relationships are friendly, professional, and mutually supportive because each entity is dependent upon the other for accreditation to go well. Each has its assigned roles to play, each watches the other to be sure that all are playing by the rules and procedures, and each has reason to rely on the other. Some members of CAAHEP's Board of Directors are CoA members. A present or former CAAHEP Board member is a liaison to each of the CoAs and attends CoA meetings. There is an electronic communications system that connects CAAHEP staff and leadership with CoA staff and leadership.

CAAHEP is expected to stay apprised of developments in the larger world of accreditation and bring information to the CoAs. CAAHEP is expected to be the first line of defense when legal issues arise and to apprise CoAs of changes in the legal environment. CAAHEP is expected to manage the Standards-setting process. CAAHEP is expected to develop services to the CoAs and to promote good practices developed in one CoA for possible adaptation to others.

CoAs are expected to function within CAAHEP policies, to attend workshops and membership events, to communicate issues that arise to the CAAHEP leadership, and, of course, to handle accreditation work within CAAHEP policies and to make accreditation recommendations.

As a program director, CAAHEP's workings are matters of interest, perhaps. But most of the time, your interaction will be with a CoA. When (which, fortunately, is rare) a problem arises that a CoA cannot resolve, use your discretion but if you think it might help, contact the CAAHEP office.

GETTING READY FOR THE PROCESS

If you've gotten this far in YAM, you know that your goal for the accreditation process is: to systematically answer the fundamental question, How good is this educational program?

You accomplish this through interaction with a Committee on Accreditation (CoA). You know that you will be gathering and analyzing and reporting data. You know that you are the key person in the process.

You know that this systematic process ofevidence-gathering, analysis, reporting, review, etc., is continuous. You know the process is "outcomes based."

So are you ready? Yes, IF:

• You have found your CoA's website or received its instructions in print;
• You have studied the exact details of your CoA's practices, timetable, forms, etc.
• You have found and studied the Standards that apply and are confident you know what they mean and you have given careful consideration to the Guidelines;
• You have asked questions until you are certain you know what is expected of you;
• You have made certain you know your accreditation status (if any), and what is required of you to keep your status up to date.
• You have built (or inherited from your predecessor) files -- either on paper, or electronically -- to house all the data about your program, all the student records, all the schedules, all the resources, all the contracts, all the survey results, etc., as prescribed by your CoA's data requests;

If you haven't done these preliminary things -- Do them NOW. There is no substitute for them.

Once you've done these preliminaries, there should be no mystery about the accreditation process; you very likely will do everything correctly the first time; and you and your program will gain the most benefit from the process.

There is an alternative to taking these preliminary steps, but don't take this alternative route: you can charge into the process and muddle through, make mistakes that cost you time and excess effort, learn from your errors, but benefit little from the process besides anguish. You can do this; too many have. You'll hate the process.

To state this advice in one succinct sports metaphor: Understand the rules before you play the game. Or, as the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts say: Be Prepared.

WHO CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS?

Within your institution, there may be someone whose job it is to help program directors through accreditation. If so, find that person and hold on tight! (If they cannot answer your questions, they surely can tell you who can.)

Often a dean, department chairperson, or another senior administrator is your best resource; they likely have been through accreditation themselves and have worked with other beginners before you.

Colleagues in another institution with similar responsibilities to your own may be helpful, especially if they've been responsible for accreditation for awhile.

And your CoA is always a good source. Your CoA is always just a phone call or an e-mail away.

Some CoAs offer workshops to Program Directors; these are excellent opportunities to ask questions of knowledgeable people face-to-face.

Some CoAs offer workshops designed for site visitors (the kinds of people who are chosen to visit Programs such as yours). While these workshops are not primarily for Program Directors, Program Directors often attend.

Most CoAs have annual conferences, or participate in annual conferences within their professional societies; these events represent another opportunity to find the right people and to talk face-to-face.

There are some private consultants who, for a fee, can guide you through accreditation. Your CoA can recommend someone.

THE TWO LARGEST STEPS: SELF-STUDY, SITE VISIT

While accreditation is an ongoing process, every few years you will face two large activities that will stand out for you as the most important, most time-consuming, and (if you do them well) most rewarding activities: The self-study, and the site visit.

Self study itself has two components: studying your own program and writing a report about your program for your CoA to review.

Site visits also have two components: preparing for the visit, and experiencing the visit.

In the rest of YAM, we offer tips for accomplishing these two steps well. Don't forget, YAM is a primer containing good advice. But you must know the exact details of your activities, and these come from your CoA.

Setting all the details aside and the report-writing aside for a moment, the most valuable part of self-study is the very fact that you take time to look carefully at your program from perspectives that are different from what you see in your management of day-to-day activity. The process requires that you see the sum of the past several years, along with your plans for coming years, from your profession's perspective, from your students' perspective, and from society's perspective. You are compelled to look at results and to ask of yourself what is going well and not-so-well, and to assess what needs to change. Embrace this opportunity; approach it with gusto; don't give it short shrift; don't dread it; don't shirk it. It's in this introspection where the opportunity to sustain and improve quality is seized or lost.

Writing a self-study report forces the discipline of seeing and writing clearly about your thoughts.

Having a team of peers visit your program, your self-study report in hand, to try to verify what you've reported is further challenge to you to understand the condition and needs of your program well, and to state them succinctly.

But neither the written study nor the visit will be as consequential as your own perspective; the report and the site visit exist primarily to reinforce your need to think clearly about your program; secondarily, they help others attest (or as accreditors like to say, "verify the self-study"), that your program is "in the zone" of meeting Standards and deserves to be accredited.

TIPS TO ACCOMPLISHING THE SELF-STUDY

Budget the time and money required. Think about this well in advance -- by a year or two, if possible.

Accreditation is not a government funded activity, as you know, and is accomplished because fees are paid. Either your program's budget, or an institutional budget, will have to handle the costs -- depending upon the local custom.

Because budgeting often occurs over at least one and occasionally more than one year, it is important to anticipate the costs and not surprise anyone as the time for activity occurs. Some of the possible costs are: Additional clerical staff support; fees to your CoA; travel expenses for site visitors; document copying. Consultant help, if you need it, will be a cost. Attending a CoA-sponsored event or two (in addition to those you would routinely attend) will be a cost.

Doing your self study and writing a report, preparing for a site visit and conducting it also are time-consuming. Your colleagues who have experienced these steps can give you some framework for estimating time requirements. It may be that you will need to delegate some activities, with budget consequence for other people's time.

Ask your dean, your colleagues, and your CoA to help you be sure that all costs and time requirements have been anticipated.

DATA COLLECTION

Your CoA will spell out all the data that you need to collect. Read, and heed, the requirements. (And if you don't understand something, ask!)

Be organized. In order to thoroughly describe your program to others, when reporting time comes, and in order to analyze the outcomes of your program and to plan ways to meet any shortcomings you find, you will need to be a systematic keeper of everything about your program.

Fellow program directors will caution that it is wise -- and makes your life easier -- if you are aware of the data requirements very early in your life as a program director.

Keep a file for each kind of data, and weekly or periodically keep these files up to date. If you delegate record-keeping, don't let "out of sight" become "out of mind." Be sure you know what is needed and that your staff person knows this as well.

---

If your program is seeking initial accreditation, set up files and be sure from the beginning to collect everything you will need.

If you are the new director of an ongoing program that has or is seeking continuing accreditation, locate your predecessor's files or (worst case) start a set of files and make it your priority to gather the data that hasn't been previously gathered for you.

---

When it comes time for you to make reports -- whether annual reports or self-studies -- nothing is better than having all your data at hand. Nothing is harder at the last minute than having to ferret out data from dozens of places or to reconstruct data that no one saved. From an accreditation standpoint, this is the most important reason to have thorough and up-to-date files.

There is another reason for thorough and up-to-date files: You will find that once you have the habit of corralling all the data for accreditation, it will help you do other parts of your job better as well -- including such tasks as staff and student evaluation, student recruitment, curriculum planning, budget development, and more.

ACCREDITATION HUMOR

It is often said that one should have a sense of humor about the accreditation process. So, to conclude YAM on such a note, we searched for humor you could use.

We searched the Internet far and wide, looking for anyone who found any aspect of accreditation humorous. It would appear that death and taxes, economic collapse and exorcism, root canals and cancer each inspire more humor than accreditation does. [People take accreditation seriously; so should you.]

The one exception is a variation on the classic Devil and St. Peter story. It seems to be the only “joke” known to accreditors, and is frequently told in speeches on the subject. You'll find one version below.

But as luck would have it, as we worked on YAM and spent a day recording the video clips, 3 participants offered a laugh or two by improvising two skits and one observation.

So, please enjoy a couple of rare lighthearted moments, and one joke, about the usually-very-serious subject of accreditation:

The skits, Take 1:

[Video Clip #1]

The skits, Take 2:

[Video Clip #11]

The observation:

[Video Clip #28]

A Devil and St. Peter Story

One day while walking down the street an educator who was a veteran of many Committee on Accreditation meetings -- with dozens of accreditation decisions and 34 site visits to her credit -- was tragically hit by a bus and she died. Her soul arrived at the Pearly Gates where she was greeted by St. Peter himself.

“Welcome!” said St.Peter. "Are you ready for your site visits?"

"Excuse me," the veteran site visitor said, "Did you say 'site visits?'"

"Exactly," said St. Peter. "In order to assure quality in both eternal establishments, we program two site visits by each new entrant to eternity. You will conduct a site visit to Hell for one day; on the agenda you'll interview Satan if he's available or a senior administrator, visit with some of the other residents, observe some activities, meet with Hell's advisory committee, and then consider how attractive Hell is for you. Then you will visit Heaven for one day; on the agenda you'll interview God if he's available or a senior prophet, visit with residents, observe activities, meet with Heaven's advisory committee and consider how attractive Heaven is for you. Then you'll return to the Pearly Gates and make a recommendation to me.

"There is but one Standard," said St. Peter, "ordained by our Lord, which is simple this: Each entrant to eternity shall spend eternity in the most appropriate location. We also heed the holy Guideline, namely, Each entrant to eternity is the best judge of eternity's appropriateness. So after your site visits, you and you alone will judge which institution is the more pleasing setting for your eternity."

“Actually, I think I've made up my mind…I prefer to stay in Heaven”, volunteered the woman.

“Sorry," said St. Peter, "but we have rules and procedures that help us implement the Standard and Guideline fairly for all…” You may spend eternity in Limbo if you wish; but if either Heaven or Hell is your goal, the process I've shared with you is not really voluntary."

And with that St. Peter put the veteran site visitor in an elevator and it went down-down-down to Hell. The doors opened and she found herself stepping out onto the green of a beautiful campus golf course. In the distance was a country club and a golf course, and standing in front of her were some of her colleagues and peers - fellow Committee on Accreditation members and Program directors that she had worked with, and they were all dressed in evening gowns and cheering for her. They ran up and kissed her on both cheeks and they talked about old times. They toured, they golfed, and at night at the club she enjoyed an excellent steak and lobster dinner. She met the Devil himself, who was actually a really nice guy (kinda cute), and she had a great time telling jokes and dancing. She marveled at the facilities, met with advisors, and was having such a good time that before she knew it, it was time to leave. Everybody shook her hand and waved good-bye as she got on the elevator.

The elevator went up-up-up and opened back up at the Pearly Gates and found St. Peter waiting for her. “Now it's time to visit Heaven for a day,” he said.

So she spent the next 24 hours with more of her former colleagues and peers. She met not only with God but briefly with Jesus and Moses as well, spent time with a heavenly advisory committee, chatted with so many angels she lost count, toured the golden facilities, dined on ambrosia and even found time to lounge around on clouds playing the harp and singing. It was a wondrous experience and before she knew it her 24 hours were up and St. Peter came and got her.

“So, you've visited Hell for a day and you've visited Heaven for a day. Now you must report the choice you'll make for your eternity,” he said.

The veteran site visitor paused for a second and then replied, “Well, I never thought I'd say this, I mean, Heaven has been really great and all, but I think I had a better time in Hell.”

So St. Peter escorted her to the elevator and again she went down-down-down. When the doors of the elevator opened she found herself standing in a desolate wasteland covered in garbage and filth. She saw her friends were dressed in rags and were picking up the garbage and putting it in sacks. The Devil came up to her and put his welcoming arm around her.

“I don't understand,” stammered the woman, “yesterday when I visited there was a campus and a golf course and a country club and we ate lobster and we danced and had a great time. Now all there is is a wasteland of garbage and all my friends look miserable.”

The Devil looked at her and smiled. “Yesterday was the site visit,” he said. “Today is business as usual."