Assuring that actions of team members are made from within the framework of agency standards and determining the relevance of information used for accreditation.

Questions to ask your accreditation agency:

• What areas do the standards cover?
• Who created your agency's standards?
• What process was used?
• How does the agency assess the validity of its standards?
• How often are the standards revised?
• What are objective measures for each standard?

During the evaluation process, site team members will decide whether particular issues are within the scope of their authority and whether the information is useful for decision making. When faced with an issue, the first question to ask is whether it has an impact on the institution or program's ability to comply with the accreditation agency's standards. All accreditation agencies have standards that establish minimum levels of quality around which evaluations and accreditation decisions must be based. The team should refrain from addressing issues that fall outside those standards.

Standards are created through a consensus process that calls for input from educators, students, practitioners, regulators and the general public. That input is gathered by the accreditation agency staff and, after a long process of comment and revision, accepted by the agency's decision making body or governing body. Standards are routinely revised as recommended by the U.S. department of education using the same or similar processes.

An accreditation agency may have a few standards or many standards, but most cover aspects of the following areas:

• Academics & Research
• Curriculum
• Ethics/Integrity
• Evaluation & Assessment of Outcomes
• Faculty
• Financial Resources
• Library, Information & Learning Resources
• Mission & Planning
• Organization & Administration
• Physical, Laboratory & Training Facilities
• Students
• Support Services

Standards often have two components. The first component is the requirements that the program or institution must achieve. The second component is one or more guidelines that suggest or illustrate how to fulfill the requirements. Often, the first component is regarded as non-negotiable, whereas guidelines may be viewed as somewhat flexible or providing interpretations of how to meet standards. Team members should always strive to interpret standards from within the context of a program or institution's unique mission whenever possible.

Although a program or institution's mission should not be used to supercede standards, applicable laws may. For example, even though an agency's standards might explicitly prohibit discrimination of any kind, Section 2000e-2 [Section 703] of the U.S. Civil Rights Act permits religious institutions to hire employees on the basis of religion, thereby making them exempt from accreditation standards that target certain types of religious discrimination.

Even though you may have a thorough understanding of the standards, sometimes it is not immediately obvious whether a standard applies or which ones apply. For example, two faculty members having personal disagreements is not typically covered by accreditation standards; however, if the disagreement affects overall faculty or student morale, then accreditation standards may be involved and the disagreement itself may need to be addressed. Team members must also use their judgment to determine whether information is important enough to consider. Some key questions to ask are:

• Is the information source reliable?
• Is the information verifiable?
• Does the information validate the self study or contradict it?
• Is the information significant for improving the institution?
• Is the information or situation already being addressed elsewhere by the team?

The relevance of issues and the appropriate application of standards will generate much thought and discussion among team members and may even result in an occasional phone call for consultation with accreditation agency staff. Discussions resulting from each site visit will test the validity of the standards and will help them to evolve and improve over time.