Sec.10a-34-6. Quality assessment

(a) Methods of quality assessment. Depending on the nature and scope of the proposal, an institution or program may be evaluated by any of the following means:

(1) Any institution or program may be evaluated by means of a site visit by an evaluation committee, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (b) of this section of these regulations.

(2) Institutions accredited by the Board which have regional accreditation shall be reaccredited by the Board on the basis of an evaluation visit conducted by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges or another recognized accrediting association or on the basis of a progress report to such an association, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (c) of this section of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.

(3) Applications for licensure or accreditation of a program at an accredited institution may be evaluated by means of a focused site visit, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of this section of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.

(4) Applications for licensure or accreditation of a program at an accredited institution may be evaluated by the Advisory Committee on Accreditation on the basis of the written application, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (e) of this section of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies. The Commissioner shall determine the method of quality assessment. If the Commissioner determines that an evaluation visit is needed, the evaluation shall proceed as provided in subsections (b), (c) or (d) of this section of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies. If the Commissioner determines that an evaluation visit is not needed, the application shall be forwarded to the Advisory Committee on Accreditation for review in accordance with subsection (e) of this section of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.

(b) Evaluation visits. An evaluation visit shall be conducted in accordance with the following procedures:

(1) The Commissioner shall be responsible for selection and appointment of a committee of qualified evaluators, in consultation with the chairperson of the Advisory Committee on Accreditation. Prior to appointment of the evaluation committee, the Commissioner shall provide the applicant institution with a list of potential evaluators. The applicant institution shall have an opportunity to state any objections regarding individuals identified in the list. The recommendations and objections of the applicant institution shall be taken into consideration in the appointment of the committee.

(2) The evaluation committee shall include at least one out-of-state evaluator, at least one member of the Advisory Committee on Accreditation, and at least one member with teaching experience in the relevant program area(s). A staff member of the Department of Higher Education shall be assigned to coordinate each evaluation visit.

(3) The report of the evaluation committee shall be prepared in accordance with a format developed by the Commissioner. For each standard in Sections 10a-34-9 through 10a-34-24, inclusive, of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies, the report shall include (A) a determination of compliance or noncompliance and (B) an explanation of the basis for such determination. The report also shall respond to any specific questions or concerns raised by the Advisory Committee on Accreditation or the Commissioner. The committee shall summarize the report by identifying areas of strength and areas in need of improvement. Copies of the draft report shall be submitted to all committee members for comment, and the report shall be thereupon revised accordingly. A copy of the revised report shall be given to the chief executive officer of the constituent unit, if applicable, and the president of the applicant institution for comment on factual accuracy.

(4) Following institutional review of the report, the Advisory Committee on Accreditation shall review the report and forward a statement to the Board and the Commissioner indicating whether or not the institution or program complies substantially with the approval standards in Sections 10a-34-9 through 10a-34-24, inclusive, of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.

(5) The applicant institution shall be responsible for all expenses relating to the evaluation, including but not limited to travel expenses, meals, overnight accommodations, and, in the case of each out-of-state evaluator, a standard fee to be determined by the Commissioner.

(c) Evaluations by recognized accrediting associations. The Board of Governors shall accept New England Association accreditation of institutions of higher learning or, where appropriate, national accreditation as the basis for Board accreditation unless the Board finds cause not to rely upon such accreditation. The Board shall base its finding of cause on one or more of the following procedures and criteria:

(1) A finding by the regional accrediting agency that the institution or program is not eligible for full accreditation, is a candidate for accreditation, is eligible only for provisional accreditation, or is eligible only for probationary status.

(2) Evidence provided by the Commissioner that an interim evaluation has identified non-compliance with one or more of the Board's approval standards. The Department of Higher Education staff may participate as observers in the evaluations conducted by the regional accrediting agency at the direction of the Commissioner and, in the case of independent institutions, with the concurrence of the institution. The procedures in this subsection also may be used for joint evaluations with the State Department of Education and such other state licensing or approval bodies as may be appropriate and pertinent.

(d) Focused site visits.

(1) When the Commissioner has specific questions or concerns about a proposed program at an accredited institution that may not require a full evaluation visit, the Commissioner may appoint a site team to conduct a visit focusing on the matters of concern. Depending on the nature of the concerns, the visit may be conducted by two or more of the following: a member of the Advisory Committee on Accreditation, a staff member of the Department of Higher Education, and/or other appropriately qualified individuals. The necessary expenses of the site team shall be paid by the applicant institution.

(2) The report of the visit shall address the specific questions and concerns raised by the Commissioner. Following receipt of the report, the Advisory Committee on Accreditation shall review the report and forward a statement to the Board and the Commissioner indicating whether or not the proposed program complies substantially with the approval standards in Sections 10a-34-9 through 10a-34-24, inclusive, of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.

(e) Evaluation based on the written application.

(1) An application for program licensure or accreditation submitted by an accredited institution may be evaluated on the basis of the written application if the Advisory Committee on Accreditation and the Commissioner concur that (A) the institution's approved programs provide a sound base of academic support for the proposed program, (B) that the institution has the resources and expertise to offer the proposed program, and (C) the application is in good order.

(2) Following a review of the application and all supporting materials, the Advisory Committee on Accreditation shall forward a statement to the Board and the Commissioner indicating whether or not the proposed program complies substantially with the approval standards in Sections 10a-34-9 through 10a-34-24, inclusive, of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.

(3) In the case of a proposed undergraduate program submitted by a regionally accredited Connecticut institution and judged by the Commissioner to be closely related to existing approved programs, review by the Advisory Committee on Accreditation may be postponed until after the program has been in operation for a period of time to be determined by the Board.

(f) Progress reports. An interim progress report may be required by the Board as a condition for approval, except in the case of institutional reaccreditation done in accordance with Section 10a-34-5a. Progress reports shall be prepared in a format developed by the Commissioner and shall be reviewed by the Commissioner and the Advisory Committee on Accreditation. The Commissioner may, after consulting with the Advisory Committee, accept the report, call for a focused visit, or require an interim evaluation visit in accordance with the provisions of subsection (g) of Section 10a-34-6 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.

(g) Interim evaluations. The Commissioner may initiate a reevaluation of an institution or program at any time provided that for institutions reaccredited by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges one of the following conditions shall be substantiated:

(1) that the institution is in continuing serious financial difficulty which is affecting its ability to carry out its mission. The institution shall share with the Commissioner all information relating to its relationship with the federal government including its eligibility status for federal financial aid.

(2) that the institution has experienced a substantive change in charter and/or mission, ownership, control or governance. Interim evaluations shall be conducted by a staff member of the Department of Higher Education appointed by the Commissioner, a member of the Advisory Committee on Accreditation appointed by the chairperson of the Advisory Committee, and any other person(s) deemed necessary. If the evaluation results in a determination of noncompliance, the Commissioner shall, after consultation with the Advisory Committee, prepare a report and recommendation to the Board. The necessary expenses of the evaluation shall be paid by the institution offering the program.

(Effective May 27, 1993; Amended December 2, 1999)