Progress Report Format

Under the WASC Handbook ofAccreditation, when taking accreditation action, the Commission may request additional reports focused on identified issues of concern. The institution is asked to prepare a Progress Report as described below. The Interim Report Committee reviews the Progress Report and recommends a response to the institution.

Progress Reports should follow the format described below. Such Reports are intended to be limited in scope, not to be comprehensive evaluations of the institution. The Report should help prepare the Interim Report Committee to understand the progress made by the institution in addressing the issues identified by the Commission and the major recommendations of the last visiting team. Five copies are to be submitted to the WASC office by the date specified in the Commission action letter.

A Progress Report should include the following: I,

1. Cover Sheet. The cover sheet should specify that the document is a Progress Report. It should include the date of submission, the name and address of the institution, and the name of the person submitting the Report.

2. Table of Contents.

3. Nature of the Institutional Context. The purpose of this section is to describe sufficiently the nature of the institution so that the Interim Report Committee can understand the issues in context. Describe the institution's background; mission; and history, including the founding date, year first accredited, geographic locations, etc.

4. Statement on Report Preparation. Describe in narrative form the process of Report. preparation, naming those who were involved in it. Because of the focused nature of a Progress Report, the widespread and comprehensive involvement of various institutional constituencies is not required. Faculty, administrative staff and others should be involved as appropriate to the topics being addressed in the preparation of the institutional response. Campus constituencies, such as faculty leadership and, where appropriate, the Board of Trustees, should review the report before it is submitted to WASC, and such reviews should be indicated.

5. Institutional Summary Data Form (http://www.wascweb.org/senior/SUMMSHT_02.pdf)

6. Response to Issues Identified by the Commission and the last visiting team. This main section of the Report should address those issues highlighted by the last team and identified by the Commission as topics for the Progress Report. Each topic identified in the Commission's action letter and each major recommendation in the team report serve as a focus. The institution should not respond to every issue discussed within the body of the team report. Identify each key issue, providing a full description of the issue, and the action taken by the institution, along with an analysis of the effectiveness of tile response. It is important that this section of the report include not only a description of the responses undertaken by the institution, but equally important, an assessment of the impact of these changes. Have they been successful in resolving the problem? What is the evidence supporting progress? What further problems or issues remain? How will such issues be addressed, by whom, and under what timetable?

7. Identification of Other Changes or Issues Currently Confronting the Institution. This brief section should identify any other significant changes that have occurred at the institution (e.g., changes in key personnel, major new programs, modifications in the governance structure, or significant financial results) that are not otherwise described or identified in the preceding section. This will help the Interim Report Committee gain a clearer sense of the current status of the institution and understand the context in which the responses of the institution discussed under #6 have taken place.

8. Institutional Plans to Address the New Expectations of the 2001 Handbook. Effective July 1, 2002, all reviews are being conducted under the 2001 Handbook of Accreditation. Progress on issues identified for the Progress Report are to be reviewed within the context of the 2001 Standards of Accreditation and institutions should review them in assessing the effectiveness of actions in response to Commission concerns under the Standards of Accreditation which led to the Progress Report. Looking to the future, since the new Handbook identifies higher expectations for institutional data analysis and evidence, and the review and improvement of student learning, it will be important to begin plans to address the new Standards of Accreditation. This section of the Progress Report is intended to be brief and only identify I the plans or process the institution intends to use to prepare itself for its next comprehensive review under the 2001 Standards of Accreditation and the new mufti?;stage review process.

9. Concluding Statement. Reflect on how the institutional response to the issues raised by the Commission has had an impact upon the institution, proposing recommendations and
follow-up steps.

10. Required Documents.
-current catalog(s);
-completed Set of Required Data Exhibits (http://www.wascweb.org/senior/Data_Exhibits.pdf)
-most recent Annual Report to the Commission;
-budget for current year;
-most recent financial statement and audit by an independent professional agency or, if a
public institution, by the appropriate state agency; management letters, if any; and
organization charts or tables, both administrative and academic, highlighting any major
changes since the last visit.