Accreditation

Core Component Lead to submit draft Assurance Arguments for Criteria 1 and 2 to Accreditation Liaison Officer (ALO), Stephen Strom.

 

Select Assurance Argument Development Team members, ALO and Core Component leads complete a cohesive draft of Criterion 1 and 2 including evidence files.

 

Select Assurance Argument Development Team members, ALO and Core Component leads complete a cohesive draft of Criterion 5 including evidence files.

 

Select Assurance Argument Development Team members, ALO and Core Component leads complete a cohesive draft of Criteria 3 and 4 including evidence files.

 

Mock Visits

 

HLC Peer Review Team to conduct an on-site Comprehensive Evaluation Visit.

DECEMBER 2, 2024

 Please find attached the College’s final draft version of the assurance argument for Criterion 3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resource, and Support.  This Criterion argument is approximately 15,000 words.  You might remember from an earlier Met…Together communication that Criterion 3 was where the majority (8 of 12) of our monitoring focus areas were located; three in 3.A and five in 3.C.  As a result, we spent a great portion of our effort and word-count addressing these areas.  As a reminder, some evidence file links may not be active as we work to get them all cataloged and linked.

Special thanks to Erin Sonneveldt and Sara Glasgow (Core Components 3.A and 3.B Co-leads) and Renee DeYoung (Core Component 3.D Lead) and their teams.

Thanks again to the following core team members in bringing together all the pieces:

Jennifer Wood – evidence file research and discovery
Mary Tsaloff – evidence file research and cataloging
Melanie Leaver – evidence file embedding and final editing
Erin Sonneveldt – final editing through the lens of an external reviewer (did we answer the core component and sub-component statements?) and ensuring evidence files align with the statements

Please read the argument as time allows to see how we meet the accreditation criteria around Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resource, and Support.

NOVEMBER 25, 2024

 As the core assurance argument development team puts final touches on our final draft of College’s HLC Assurance Argument for our March 2025 Comprehensive Evaluation Visit (we are finishing the last criterion, Criterion 3 now), we plan to reshare final edited versions of the other four criteria arguments over the next few weeks.

Please find attached the final edited version of Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct.  As we share these documents, there maybe a few evidence files still pending, but we’ve also included the summary for each as well.

Thank you to everyone across the campus for your input into completing the criterion argument and for the work you all have done in support of our effort related to the integrity of the College.

NOVEMBER 13, 2024

 Please find attached the College’s final draft version of the assurance argument for Criterion 4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement.  This Criterion argument is approximately 8,300 words.  As mentioned in an earlier e-mail, the majority of our 35,000-word limit will be included in the arguments for Criteria 3 and 4; both focus on Teaching and Learning.  The approximate word count for Criteria 1, 2, 4 and 5 is 19,700, leaving just over 15,000 words to address Criterion 3.  Asa reminder, some evidence file links may not be active as we work to get them all cataloged and linked.

Special thanks to Erin Sonneveldt and Sara Glasgow (Core Component 4.B Co-leads) and Renee DeYoung and Erin Sonneveldt (Core Component 4.C Co-leads) and their teams.

As with the Criteria 1,2 and 5 final argument drafts, we are also using a core team to develop the final version of the overall assurance argument.  Thanks to:

Jennifer Wood – evidence file research and discovery
Mary Tsaloff – evidence file research and cataloging
Melanie Leaver – evidence file embedding and final editing
Erin Sonneveldt – final editing through the lens of an external reviewer (did we answer the core component and sub-component statements?) and ensuring evidence files align with the statements

Please read the argument as time allows to see how we meet the accreditation criteria around Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement. 

NOVEMBER 5, 2024

As mentioned over the past several months, our HLC Comprehensive Evaluation Visit is March 10–11, 2025. In an earlier Met…Together communication, we introduced the members of the peer review team who will be conducting our visit. What exactly will the visit entail?  Please find attached visit schedules from recently completed evaluations at two community colleges in our benchmark group – Lansing Community College (2024) and East Central College in Missouri (2022).  Both colleges shared these schedules on their accreditation websites.

As you look at these two schedules, there will be many similarities. There are scheduled meetings to discuss each of the five HLC Criteria for Accreditation. These might be five separate meetings as seen in the schedule for East Central College or some combination as seen in the schedule for Lansing Community College. The peer review team will meet with the President, Cabinet, and other groups (e.g., SPAT, Assessment Academy, CRD/AP, IR, Finance and Facilities, Board of Trustees, etc.). There may also be college-specific topics to discuss; for us, this may include the 12 focus areas in our most recent interim monitoring report (Core Components 3.A (3), 3.C (5), 4.A (3) and 4.B (1)). The visit will end on Tuesday with an exit interview and the team will depart on Wednesday.

What do you need to do? Over the next few months, we will finalize the visit schedule and be able to share out with the College community. In the meantime, continue to familiarize yourself with the information distributed through these e-mails and periodically check our accreditation webpage (https://www.ncmich.edu/about-us/accreditation/ ). Once our visit schedule is finalized, we will work to connect the right people and groups with the scheduled meetings to ensure we fully answer any questions posed by the team and share our story of success!          

OCTOBER 28, 2024

 As the College finishes development of the assurance argument for Criteria 3 and 4, we wanted to take time in this communication to explain how this journey for other community colleges has helped in our own.  Our accreditor, HLC, includes a membership of nearly 1,000 colleges and universities.  At any one time, there are dozens of institutions exactly where we find ourselves…finishing preparation for the HLC Comprehensive Evaluation Visit.  Many of these colleges and universities, like us, share the journey and material on their institutional websites.  You can find our accreditation visit website here: https://www.ncmich.edu/about-us/accreditation/

NCMC’s core assurance argument development team continues to use two primary college websites as benchmarks in completing our work.

• Iowa Lakes Community College (April 2023 evaluation visit): https://iowalakes.edu/about/accreditation/hlc-assurance-argument/
• Lansing Community College (September 2024 evaluation visit): https://www.lcc.edu/about/accreditation/reaccreditation.html

These and other similar college websites have helped us in the structure of our document, often verifying our writing and evidence files created.  Many members of NCMC’s core assurance argument development team also attended the HLC Annual Conference in April 2024.  This professional development opportunity allowed us to listen to others who recently completed the journey and offered ideas for a successful visit; we have implemented many of the ideas presented.

Please take the time to familiarize yourself with the NCMC Accreditation page.  The page will be continually updated through the visit in March 2025.

OCTOBER 21, 2024

Please find attached the College’s final version of the assurance argument for Criterion 5. Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning.  This Criterion argument is 4,649 words, longer than each argument for Criteria 1 and 2.  As mentioned in an earlier e-mail, the majority of our 35,000-word limit will be included in the arguments for Criteria 3 and 4; both focus on Teaching and Learning.  We are finalizing the argument for Criterion 4 now.

Special thanks to again Tom Zeidel (Criterion 5 and Core Component 5.B Lead) along with Carol Laenen (Core Component 5.C Lead), and Melissa Mansfield (Core Component 5.A Lead) and their teams.

As with the Criteria 1 and 2 final argument drafts, we are also using a core team to develop the final version of the overall assurance argument.  Thanks to:

Jennifer Wood – evidence file research and discovery
Mary Tsaloff – evidence file research and cataloging
Melanie Leaver – evidence file embedding and final editing
Erin Sonneveldt – final editing through the lens of an external reviewer (did we answer the core component and sub-component statements?) and ensuring evidence files align with the statements

Please read the argument as time allows to see how we meet the accreditation criteria around Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning.

OCTOBER 11, 2024

 Please find attached the College’s final version of the assurance argument for Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct.  While you will find only 3,331 words – slightly longer than the Criterion 1 final draft shared two weeks ago – to reach this final stage, again more than two dozen people spent in excess of 300 hours developing, writing and editing the argument and connecting the right evidence at the appropriate places in the text.

Special thanks to again Carol Laenen (Criterion 2 and Core Component 2.B Lead) along with Tom Zeidel (Core Component 2.A Lead), Melissa Mansfield (Core Component 2.C Lead), and Erin Sonneveldt (Core Component 2.E Lead) and their teams.

As with the Criterion 1 final draft, we are also using a core team to develop the final version of the overall assurance argument.  Thanks to:

Jennifer Wood – evidence file research and discovery
Mary Tsaloff – evidence file research and cataloging
Melanie Leaver – evidence file embedding and final editing
Erin Sonneveldt – final editing through the lens of an external reviewer (did we answer the core component and sub-component statements?) and ensuring evidence files align with the statements

Please read the argument as time allows to see how we meet the accreditation criteria around Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct.

OCTOBER 3, 2024

Earlier this week, our HLC peer review team was finalized for our March 10-11, 2025 Comprehensive Evaluation Visit.  Before sharing the team composition, I would like to provide information on the actual on-site visit.  HLC provides a procedure document – On-Site Visits – that details the visit.  The document provides guidance on how the peer review team and the College interact, definition on team activities while on campus, team and College communication, and reporting and decision-making.  When you have time, please read this 4-page document.

The procedural document allows us to share the names of team members, titles, and college or institutional affiliations.  Our 5-member team includes:

Michael Glen Boyd, Ph.D. (team chair)

President

Kankakee Community College (IL)

John Thibodeau, Ph.D.

Provost (retired)

Gateway Technical College (WI)

Paula M. Kinney, Ph.D.

Director of Strategic Planning

Saint Paul College (MN)

Kathryn L. Skulley, Ph.D.

Dean of Assessment, Strategy, and Performance Excellence/Accreditation Liaison Officer (ALO)

Community College of Aurora (CO)

Erika A. Goodwin, Ph.D.

Vice President of Academic & Student Affairs

Southern State Community College (OH)

SEPTEMBER 27, 2024

Please find attached the College’s final version of the assurance argument for Criterion 1. Mission.  While you will find only 3,125 words in this particular Criterion argument, to reach this final stage, more than 20 people spent in excess of 300 hours developing, writing and editing the argument and connecting the right evidence at the appropriate places in the text.

Special thanks to Carol Laenen (Criterion 1 and Core Component 1.A Lead) and Lynn Henry (Core Component 1.C Lead) along with their teams.

We are also using a core team to develop the final version of the overall assurance argument.  Thanks to:

• Jennifer Wood – evidence file research and discovery
• Mary Tsaloff – evidence file research and cataloging
• Melanie Leaver – evidence file embedding and final editing
• Erin Sonneveldt – final editing through the lens of an external reviewer (did we answer the core components and sub-components?) and ensuring evidence files align with the statements

Please read the argument as time allows to see how we meet the accreditation criteria around Mission.

SEPTEMBER 23, 2024

Thanks to everyone who responded to the community engagement survey we conducted several days ago.  Please find attached the evidence file we produced from the responses. This will be used to support our argument around Core Component 1.B. The institution’s mission demonstrates commitment to the public good.

The core writing, editing, and evidence files team is making excellent progress in putting together a robust argument detailing our positive work as a community college.  Your involvement in this survey and other aspects of developing the assurance argument is appreciated.  In the Met…Together communication at the end of this week, we plan to share our final draft argument for Criterion 1 – Mission.

SEPTEMBER 13, 2024

This week’s Met…Together e-mail focuses on how the College uses planning to positively impact student success strategically.  For those who attended the opening session during our recent Fall 2024 Welcome Back Week, you had the opportunity to hear a brief presentation on North Central’s Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) Plan 2024–2029.  This plan, developed by your colleagues from across the College, focuses specifically on goals, action steps, and metrics proven to improve student success.  These areas include:

• Applications
• Full-time equivalency (FTE)
• Dual-enrolled student conversion
• Persistence (fall to winter)
• Retention (fall to fall)
• Completion (Graduation)
• Transfer
• Course withdrawal

The SEM plan lays out action steps to help achieve progress within these areas.  The recently released NCMC Data Dashboard supports the tracking of metrics within these areas.

Please read this short but informative document and see where your work connects with improving student success at North Central!

SEPTEMBER 5, 2024

This week’s Met…Together e-mail is a reminder to provide us your individual input to address Criterion 1. Mission: The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the institution’s operations. In particular we are asking for your input in creating a list of activities faculty and staff engage in within the community.  This can be community service, service-learning, professional organizations, etc. We will take all input and consolidate into an evidence list to address Core Component 1.B. The institution’s mission demonstrates commitment to the public good.

Welcome Back Week was a busy time to send out this initial request, hence the reminder this week (I do realize that the first week of classes is likely busier than last week).  The survey will take less than 60-90 seconds to complete and will add value to our assurance argument for Criterion 1 and Core Component 1.B.  Thanks for your help with this!

To provide your input, please take the following survey.  We plan to leave the survey open through 9/13/2024.

Here is the link and QR code to the survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/5CTWXX8

AUGUST 28, 2024

In this Met…Together communication, we are asking for your individual input in addressing Criterion 1. Mission: The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the institution’s operations. In particular we are asking for your input in creating a list of activities faculty and staff engage in within the community.  This can be community service, service-learning, professional organizations, etc. We will take all input and consolidate into an evidence list to address Core Component 1.B. The institution’s mission demonstrates commitment to the public good.

To provide your input, please take the following survey.  We plan to leave the survey open through 9/13/2024.

Here is the link and QR code to the survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/5CTWXX8

AUGUST 23, 2024

 In this Met…Together communication, we would like to share three ongoing strategic initiatives at the College that are interconnected and significant to our work as a community college.  As a result of this interconnectedness and significance, these three initiatives become extremely important in our HLC Assurance Argument.

First is the College’s strategic plan – Thrive 2035: Strategic Plan 2020–2035.  The comprehensive version of the plan goes into great detail around goals, action plans, and objectives including key performance indicators (KPIs).  It is in the comprehensive version of the plan where we can all find how our individual and group work connects.

Secondly, and a good example of building other planning off the strategic plan, is our enrollment management plan.  The NCMC Strategic Enrollment Management Plan 2024–2029 was created by a group of nearly two dozen knowledgeable, talented, and committed colleagues from across the College.  A copy of the SEM plan is attached.  The eight goals and associated action steps align under the College’s strategic plan.

Finally, in an effort to track, measure, and manage our progress towards strategic planning and enrollment management goals, Institutional Research and Assessment has developed (and will formally deploy during Welcome Back Week next week) the Persistence, Enrollment, Retention, and Completion (PERC) Dashboards.  These dashboards will allow the user to view historical data on 12 different PERC metrics.  These metrics are tied to goals in both the strategic plan and the SEM plan.  College employees are able to access the dashboards through SharePoint here (Departments > Institutional Research and Assessment > PERC Dashboards).

This is only an introduction to these three critical strategic initiatives.  All three will be covered in more detail during various WBW presentations next week.

AUGUST 17, 2024

As the College approaches the final version of our assurance argument for Criteria 1 and 2, you might be curious what a typical assurance argument looks like.  Attached is the College’s final draft of the assurance argument for CRITERION 1. MISSION: The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the institution’s operations (Core Component 1.A. The institution’s mission is articulated publicly and operationalized throughout the institution.)

A few things to remember about the assurance argument.  We must have the completed argument and federal compliance filing uploaded in the HLC Assurance System no later than February 10, 2025 (30 days before our HLC Comprehensive Evaluation Visit).  The entire argument is limited to 35,000 words and therefore the evidence files we use become extremely important.  As you read through the attachment, you will see either an “NC-###” or “evidence” at certain places in the text.  These are places where we will have evidence files; some are already cataloged and others still need to be located and cataloged.

We appreciate the time you take to familiarize yourself with this example and the other information shared through these Met…Together e-mails.

AUGUST 10, 2024

Along with submitting our Assurance Argument by February 10, 2025 in preparation for our March 10-11, 2025 Comprehensive Evaluation Visit, we must also complete a Federal Compliance Filing.  According to HLC Procedure Federal Compliance Overview, compliance with noted requirements ensures “institutions that participate in Title IV HEA [Higher Education Act] programs remain eligible for federal financial aid.”  HLC has established the following requirements for member institutions to comply with federal regulations:

1. Assignment of Credits, Program Length and Tuition
2. Institutional Mechanisms for Handling Student Complaints
3. Publication of Transfer Policies
4. Practices for Verification of Student Identify
5. Protection of Student Privacy
6. Publication of Student Outcome Data
7. Standing with State and Other Accreditors
8. Recruiting, Admissions and Related Enrollment Practices

As with the writing of the assurance argument for each of the HLC Criteria for Accreditation, we have work groups for each of these eight federal compliance topics.  These groups will draft the responses and provide the necessary evidence documents for a successful submission of this filing by mid-December.

There are two documents attached for your review if you are interested in learning more about this federal compliance filing requirement.  The first attachment is the HLC Procedure document – Federal Compliance Overview.  Also attached, you will find the HLC Form – Federal Compliance Filing by Institutions, Effective September 1, 2024–August 31, 2025.  This form provides the topics and questions to address in the filing.

Finally, the following link takes you to the HLC webpage concerning the Federal Compliance Program: https://www.hlcommission.org/Accreditation/federal-compliance-program.html

AUGUST 1, 2024

Through several earlier Met…Together communications, we presented information on the five HLC Criteria for Accreditation and how these criteria will be used to assess NCMC during the upcoming HLC Comprehensive Evaluation Visit in March 2025.  As part of the visit, several opportunities will be offered to us as College employees and professionals to share our thoughts, particularly as they relate to the Criteria.  For the next few weeks, we will share planning and other informational documents you might find useful in formulating your thoughts and comments for these various conversational meetings in March 2025.  We also plan to have mock visits in February 2025 to provide everyone an idea of how these events will transpire.

• 2024 NCMC College Profile: https://www.ncmich.edu/about-us/facts/college-presentation-2024.pdf.  There is a wealth of information about the College that provides a greater understanding of our work and positive impact on the communities we serve.
• Thrive 2025 – NCMC Strategic Plan 2020–2035: https://www.ncmich.edu/about-us/our-team/presidents-office/strategic-plan/index.html .  Here, you will find an abundance of information on our mission, vision, and values and corresponding strategic directions and goals.  Also attached is a 1-page document that simply provides NCMC’s Mission, Vision, and Values for easy access and retention.
• NCMC Fast Facts: https://www.ncmich.edu/about-us/facts/index.html . Our fast facts webpage provides additional information useful in better understanding our College.

JULY 20, 2024

As mentioned in an earlier Met…Together e-mail, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) Criteria for Accreditation –  https://www.hlcommission.org/Policies/criteria-and-core-components.html – serve as the acceptable accreditation standards for us as an institution and include:

• Criterion 1. Mission
• Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
• Criterion 3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support
• Criterion 4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
• Criterion 5: Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning

The final Criterion to discuss is Criterion 4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement.  This Criterion is the second focused on teaching and learning at the College (Criterion 3 was discussed last week).  Criterion 4 provides the standards for quality of our educational offerings; assessment of student learning; and student persistence, retention, and completion.  Within the three Core Components of Criterion 4, NCMC was under HLC monitoring for two of these (4.A and 4.B) until the acceptance of our Interim Monitoring Report in 2023.  As HLC states, Criterion 4 provides the standards to ensure “the institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments and support services, and [that] it evaluates their effectiveness for student learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement.”

Core Component 4.A states: “The institution ensures the quality of its educational offerings.”  Our alignment with this standard has improved since 2021 through our participation in the HLC Assessment Academy.  Evidence to support this alignment includes:

• Our revised and updated program review policy, processes, schedule and guidelines
• Examples of program reviews completed in Cohort #1 during the last academic year
• Recent advisory board agendas and minutes (from our technical and healthcare programs)
• Curriculum review committee (CRD/AP) agendas and minutes
• NCMC transfer credit policies and course equivalency guides
• Transfer student resources provided by the College
• Credit for prior learning (CPL) process
• Advanced Placement and College Level Examination Program (CLEP) policies and procedures
• Academic catalog, specifically information about transfer credit and experiential learning
• Internal (CRD/AP) and external (third-party accreditors) curricular review processes
• College guidelines for hiring faculty
• Our various dual credit programs and guidelines
• Published list of all current accreditations  and statuses
• Documentation of a process for reviewing, approving and implementing new programs – our recently enacted (within the last two years) New Program Proposal template is a perfect fit here
• Licensure or certification exam results (RN, LPN, EMT/Paramedic)
• Surveys of alumni
• Articulation agreements with other institutions – this would include the MiTransfer Pathways in which we participate
• Documentation of engagement of faculty, academic administration, and governing board in academic program review process

Our monitoring for this particular Core Component centered on three focus areas:

• Clearly demonstrating that program review data is utilized for decision-making and curricular purposes as evidenced through a detailed schedule of program review and explanation of any programs not receiving a review
• Providing evidence demonstrating how the College utilizes the data from Program Review in decision-making and actions taken at the College
• Explaining how the credentials for dual credit instructors are reviewed

Our efforts put forth through the HLC Assessment Academy since 2021 allowed for the revision and update to the College’s academic program review process.  We now use a 6-year cycle for completing certificate and degree program reviews through annual cohorts each academic year.  Cohort #1 completed reviews in Winter 2024 and feedback will be provided by the start of Fall 2024.  Cohort #2 begins the review process in Fall 2024.  Through the administrative reviews completed for each cohort following each academic year, the College will have data to make decisions and take action as necessary.  Our current process for credentialing all faculty – including our adjunct and dual credit faculty – meets the intent of this standard and has been in place and used for several years.

Core Component 4.B is in place to ensure NCMC and all institutions “engage in ongoing assessment of student learning” and that we are committed to our student learning and educational outcomes.  Evidence of this engagement and commitment might include:

• General education and course, program- and institutional-level learning goals and outcomes – our CLOs, PLOs and ILOs developed through our collective work related to the HLC Assessment Academy
• Annual assessment reports
• Curriculum maps
• Faculty expectations and evaluation processes, including instruction, service, professional development, etc.
• HLC Assessment Academy agendas and minutes
• Curriculum committee (CRD/AP) agendas and minutes
• Institutional learning outcomes (ILOs) and rubrics
• Documentation of cocurricular assessment and improvements based on data – this is another focus of our HLC Assessment Academy work
• Assessment plan and/or process and calendar/ cycle

Our recent monitoring for this Core Component specifically focused developing learning goals – where we deem appropriate – for cocurricular activities consistent with the establishment and assessment of learning goals for our curricular activities.

Our collaborative work through the HLC Assessment Academy (which also doubles as our Quality Initiative under the Open Pathway accreditation process) is a primary reason the College is able to clearly address the areas within Core Component 4.B.  Without the work of the Faculty and Administrators during the critical Assessment Days scheduled over the past four semesters, the College would not be well-positioned to address this particular Core Component nor others with an emphasis on teaching and learning.

Finally, Core Component 4.C details standards for setting goals and developing strategies for improving persistence, retention, and completion rates, particularly in our degree and certificate programs.  Our evidence here will include documents and information related to:

• Our current rates of and goals for persistence, retention and completion (including our definitions of these terms)
• Strategies or initiatives implemented based on review and analysis of data to make improvements in persistence, retention and completion – our soon-to-be released strategic enrollment management plan will be key here
• Our new strategic enrollment management plan drafted and fully developed by our Student Success Committee
• Analysis of our graduation and retention rates by distinctive student populations (e.g., age, gender, race, ethnicity, first-generation status)
• Documentation of NCMC services to support student needs (e.g., writing center, math tutoring, study skills, time management, etc.)
• Suspension and probation trends
• Student advising procedures and policies

With two of the three Core Components for Criterion 4 under monitoring from our last mid-cycle review, as we craft our Assurance Argument, we will be diligent and focused in clearly explaining our work and progress made as was noted in the HLC review and approval of our 2023 Interim Monitoring Report.  As with Criterion 3, at the end of the day, NCMC meets the requirements of Criterion 4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement and its Core Components.  Our plan at this point is to have a final draft of the Criterion 4 Assurance Argument to share in late October 2024.

JULY 11, 2024

As mentioned in an earlier Met…Together e-mail, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) Criteria for Accreditation –  https://www.hlcommission.org/Policies/criteria-and-core-components.html – serve as the acceptable accreditation standards for us as an institution and include:

• Criterion 1. Mission
• Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
• Criterion 3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support
• Criterion 4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
• Criterion 5: Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning

In previous Met…Together communications, we covered Criteria 1, 2 and 5. 

Criterion 3 is one of two criteria focused on teaching and learning at the College.  Criterion 3 provides the standards for the rigor of NCMC’s academic offerings, our institutional learning outcomes (e.g., related to critical thinking, effective communication, intellectual inquiry…), necessary faculty and staff, and student learning support and resources.  Within the four Core Components of Criteria 3, NCMC was under HLC monitoring for two of these (3.A and 3.C) until the acceptance of our Interim Monitoring Report in 2023.  As HLC states, Criterion 3 provides the standards to ensure “the institution provides quality education, wherever and however its offerings are delivered.”

Core Component 3.A states: “The rigor of the institution’s academic offerings is appropriate to higher education.”  NCMC shows alignment with this particular standard in a variety of ways, including:

• Work of our curriculum committee (CRD/AP)
• Course, program, and institutional learning goals or objectives (CLOs, PLOS and ILOs)
• Internal program reviews
• External program reviews (e.g., for our Nursing and EMS/Paramedic programs)
• Simple Syllabus template
• Master Course Syllabi (MCS’s)

Our monitoring for this particular Core Component centered on:

• Faculty engagement in the process of program review
• Clear documentation of the processes used and the evidence of these processes to ensure program learning goals are consistent across all locations and delivery methods
• Clear and consistent documentation of any accrediting bodies or any other third-party organizations the College works with to aid in assuring program quality

Our faculty are clearly engaged in the process of program review, from the adjustments made through the Assessment Academy work and completion of the first Program Review cohort last academic year.  NCMC’s Nursing and EMS/Paramedic programs are also intensely reviewed as part of external third-party accreditations.  Our recent efforts through the Assessment Academy work focused on the development of course learning outcomes (CLOs), program learning outcomes (PLOs) and institutional learning outcomes (ILOs) address the second monitoring issue noted above.  Finally, our recent third-party accreditation reports for Nursing and EMS/Paramedic provide clear and consistent documentation of such accreditation.

Core Component 3.B is constructed to ensure institutions effectively engage students in research, intellectual inquiry, creative thinking, and adaptability.  For NCMC, this might include our:

• Established processes for developing curriculum and MCS’s
• Program review improvement plans
• General Education/Michigan Transfer Agreement (MTA) curriculum and PLOs
• Third-party accreditation approvals for Nursing and EMS/Paramedic

Core Component 3.C provides the standard for ensuring we have “the faculty and staff needed for effective, high-quality programs and student services.”  Evidence for this Core Component might typically include (directly from the HLC Procedure – Providing Evidence  for the Criteria for Accreditation):

• Faculty expectations and minimum qualifications
• Student-to-Faculty ratio (overall, face-to-face, and online)
• Student Affairs qualifications
• Professional development and other training opportunities for faculty and staff
• Professional development plans and evaluations for faculty and staff

Our recent monitoring for this Core Component related to five focus areas:

• Evidence of faculty participation in and the active work of the College's curriculum and assessment committees
• Process utilized for establishing faculty qualifications and evidence of use of this process
• Evidence of faculty oversight and ownership of curriculum
• Development of a faculty evaluation process and the evidence of the use of that process
• Process used to determine and set the qualifications for staff members

Our work through CRD/AP, HLC Assessment Academy, and Faculty Assessment Days clearly shows faculty participation and active work in curriculum and assessment as well as faculty oversight and ownership of the curriculum.  Our process for faculty credentialing and use of the process is also clear and applies to all faculty.  The faculty evaluation process continues to evolve with established and consistent reviews for adjunct and probationary faculty.  Student Affairs staff position qualifications are in place and used.

Finally, Core Component 3.D details standards for student learning support and resources.  Our evidence here will include documents and information about:

• NCMC Student Handbook
• NCMC Academic Catalog
• Student Support Services
• Accessibility Support Services
• Financial Aid
• Academic Advising
• Career Services
• Counseling
• Tutoring and Testing
• Student Life
• Student Senate
• Clubs
• Intercollegiate Athletics
• Military and Veteran student support
• Campus Cupboard (food pantry)
• Student and Community Resource Center (SCRC)
• Zen Den
• Library, including technology check-out and Library of Things
• Plagiarism and academic integrity training

With two of the four Core Components for Criterion 3 under monitoring from our last mid-cycle review, as we craft our Assurance Argument, we will be diligent and focused to clearly explain our work and progress made as was noted in the HLC review and approval of our 2023 Interim Monitoring Report.  At the end of the day, NCMC meets the requirements of Criterion 3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support and its Core Components.  Our plan at this point is to have a final draft of the Criterion 3 Assurance Argument to share in late October 2024.

JUNE 28, 2024

As mentioned in an earlier Met…Together e-mail, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) Criteria for Accreditation –  https://www.hlcommission.org/Policies/criteria-and-core-components.html – serve as the acceptable accreditation standards for us as an institution and include:

• Criterion 1. Mission
• Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
• Criterion 3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support
• Criterion 4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
• Criterion 5: Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning

Before we close out communication around Criteria 3 and 4, it is important to understand where colleges and universities are challenged with meeting the HLC Criteria and Core Components. Annually, HLC provides a Key Findings of the Application of the Criteria for Accreditation report.  The Academic Year 2023 report (for Comprehensive Evaluation Visits conducted September 2022 – August 2023; included 134 total institutions of which 34 , or 25%, were Associate’s institutions) can be found here: https://download.hlcommission.org/CriteriaForAccreditationData_INF.pdf .  As noted on page 8 of the report: “In AY 2023 the most frequently cited Core Components, based on the number and proportion of findings as ‘Met with concerns’ or ‘Not Met’, included the following:

• 4.B Assessment of student learning (n=36, 27%)
• 5.B Resource base (n=16, 12%)
• 5.C Systematic and integrated planning and improvement (n=16, 12%)
• 3.C Sufficiency of faculty and staff (n=12, 9%)
• 4.A Ensuring quality of educational offerings (n=10, 7%)

As in recent years, Core Component 4.B was the most frequently cited area of concern. The proportion of Core Component 4.B citations decreased 6 percentage points from last year’s level, continuing a noticeable downward trend in the last five years…[T]he five most frequently cited Core Components in AY 2023, have been consistent with the trend established in the past five years.”

Specifically for the 34 community colleges (or Associate’s institutions) in the 2023 report, the following data show institutions with “Met with Concerns” or “Not Met” ratings:

1. 4.B: Assessment of Student Learning – 13 or 38%
2. (tie) 3.C: Sufficiency of Faculty and Staff – 4 or 12%

1. (tie) 5.C: Systematic and Integrated Planning and Improvement – 4 or 12%
2. 5.B: Resource Base – 2 or 6%
3. 4.A: Ensuring Quality of Educational Offerings – 0 or 0%

This order for community colleges differs slightly from the overall numbers noted above.

As we cover Criteria 3 and 4 in the next few Met…Together communications, we will add some emphasis to Core Components 4.B (Assessment of Student Learning), 3.C (Sufficiency of Faculty and Staff), and 4.A (Ensuring Quality of Educational Offerings).  All three of these Core Components along with 3.A were noted by the evaluation team in our 2019 review as requiring follow-up reporting on 12 areas of focus.

• Core Component 4.B: Assessment of Student Learning
• Where it deems appropriate to do so, the College should develop learning goals for its cocurricular activities in a consistent manner to the establishment and assessment of learning goals for curricular activities

• Core Component 3.C: Sufficiency of Faculty and Staff
• Evidence of faculty participation in and the active work of the College's curriculum and assessment committees
• Process utilized for establishing faculty qualifications and evidence of use of this process
• Evidence of faculty oversight and ownership of curriculum
• Development of a faculty evaluation process and the evidence of the use of that process
• Process used to determine and set the qualifications for staff members

• Core Component 4.A: Ensuring Quality of Educational Offerings
• Clear demonstration that program review data is utilized for decision-making and curricular purposes including a detailed schedule of program review and explanation of any programs that might not receive review for any reason
• Evidence that demonstrates how the College utilizes the data from Program Review to guide decisions and actions taken at the College
• Explanation of how the credentials for instructors for dual credit are reviewed

• Core Component 3.A: Rigor of the Institution’s Academic Offerings is Appropriate to Higher Education
• Faculty engagement in the process of program review
• Clear documentation of the processes used and the evidence of these processes to ensure program learning goals are consistent across all locations and delivery methods
• Clear and consistent documentation of any accrediting bodies or any other third-party organizations the College works with to aid in assuring program quality

JUNE 21, 2024

As mentioned in an earlier Met…Together e-mail, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) Criteria for Accreditation –  https://www.hlcommission.org/Policies/criteria-and-core-components.html – serve as the acceptable accreditation standards for us as an institution and include:

• Criterion 1. Mission
• Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
• Criterion 3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support
• Criterion 4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
• Criterion 5: Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning

Previous Met…Together communications have covered Criteria 1 and 2.  Today, we’ll cover Criterion 5 as Criteria 3 and 4 (topics surrounding Teaching and Learning) have a wide breadth and are rich in content.  We will cover those in future communications and over a period of time.  As a reminder, each Criterion has a number of more defined Core Components that provide further structure and clarity to the overarching Criterion.

Criterion 5 focuses on our effectiveness as an institution with particular attention on resources and planning.  Criterion 5 includes three Core Components targeting administrative structures, resources, and planning.  As we write our Assurance Argument, the College will address each Core Component individually while providing documentary evidence to support the argument.

Core Component 5.A states: “Through its administrative structures and collaborative processes, the institution’s leadership demonstrates that it is effective and enables the institution to fulfill its mission.”  This happens through engagement of our internal constituencies (i.e., Board of Trustees, Administration, Faculty, Staff and Students) in planning and the development of policies and procedures.  Also assessed is the administrative use of data to reach informed decisions that are in the best interest of the College and these constituents.  Evidence here might include:

• Listings of College committees and teams (e.g., assessment, curriculum,  student success, institutional research, distance learning, etc.)
• Bylaws, policies, procedures and schedules for the College’s Board of Trustees, student senate, and other committees
• College organizational structure documents
• Agendas and minutes of the Board of Trustees, demonstrating knowledge and oversight of College finances and academic functions

As mentioned earlier, Core Component 5.B focuses on College resources.  Here we assess how our resources support the College’s educational offerings and how we plan to maintain and strengthen the quality of such moving forward.  We will evaluate the sufficiency of qualified and trained operational staff to meet our mission.  The effectiveness and efficiency of our financial processes are also reviewed.  Important evidence to include here would be:

• Audited financial statements and Composite Financial Index patterns for multiple years
• Investments in facilities and technology, including deferred maintenance
• College master plan
• Credentialing process for faculty and staff
• Training and professional development for faculty and staff
• Documentation of strategic plan investments
• Budget requests and procedures delineating flow of decision-making
• Endowment drawdown policy
• Process for monitoring expenses
• Mission statement and activities of the College’s foundation
• College enrollment management plan
• Allocation of budget for instruction, strategic plan, mission, professional development, etc.
• Duration and amount of grants received by  the institution
• Linkage of planning to current educational programs
• AFPS and CMO collective bargaining agreements

The final core component – Core Component 5.C – focuses intently on institutional planning and improvement.  Here we will address the allocation of resources aligned with the College mission and priorities.  We will show the linkage between student learning assessment with operations, planning and budgeting and how this work includes both internal and external constituents.  Evidence to support this work might include:

• Historical process of strategic plan creation and constituencies involved
• Annual updates to the College strategic plan
• Budget planning and execution procedures
• Budget allocations by major area
• Budget projections for multiple years
• College Strategic Enrollment Management Plan
• Student persistence, retention and completion data and reports
• Student learning and academic program assessment documents and reports
• Key performance indicators (KPIs) and data dashboard

As with Criteria 1 and 2, NCMC fully meets Criterion 5. Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning and its three Core Components.  We should have a final draft on the Criterion 5 Assurance Argument ready to share in late August 2024.

JUNE 15, 2024

As mentioned in an earlier Met…Together e-mail, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) Criteria for Accreditation –  https://www.hlcommission.org/Policies/criteria-and-core-components.html – serve as the acceptable accreditation standards for us as an institution and include:

• Criterion 1. Mission
• Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
• Criterion 3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support
• Criterion 4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
• Criterion 5: Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning

Having covered the mission criterion in last week’s e-mail, we move next to assessing the integrity of the institution through ethical and responsible conduct.  For Criterion 2, there are five Core Components that clearly define this ethical accreditation standard.

Core Component 2.A states: “The institution establishes and follows policies and processes to ensure fair and ethical behavior on the part of its governing board, administration, faculty and staff.”  This is shown, in part, through the development and adoption of the College’s mission; we have accomplished this through the approved strategic plan Thrive 2035.  As part of the College’s reflection on this Core Component, we also evaluate how we operate – with integrity – within our financial, academic, human resources, and other auxiliary functions.  Evidence here might include:

• College qualifications and processes for hiring faculty and staff
• Independent external and internal audits since our comprehensive evaluation
• Any Bond rating since last comprehensive evaluation
• Schedule of and minutes for NCMC Board of Trustees audit and/or finance committee meetings
• Documentation supporting our training related to integrity issues and ethical behavior (e.g., sexual harassment, sexual assault, campus safety, etc.)
• NCMC handbooks for employees (staff and/or faculty) and students
• College grievance policy for faculty, staff and students (if not delineated in handbooks)
• Institutional policies on non-discrimination, anti- harassment, FERPA, anti-nepotism, intellectual property, Title IX, etc.

Core Component 2.B is concerned with how we present the College to our students and the public, ensuring such presentation is clear and complete.  We accomplish this through the accurate representation of our academic offerings, cost to students, faculty and staff, and accreditation relationships.  Evidence might include:

• The NCMC Academic catalog that includes program requirements for all our degrees and certificates
• Planned course schedules supporting all degrees and certificates
• Published list of all current accreditations and statuses (e.g., ACEN, CAAHEP, etc.)
• Tuition and fees information and a net price calculator
• College Faculty and staff rosters
• Recruitment and admissions documents for prospective students indicating requirements for institutional and program entry
• Agendas and minutes from student athlete advisory committee and/or student government association
• Documentation of partnerships with internal and external entities to offer community service opportunities or service-learning experiences
• Documentation of any volunteer clubs and detail of student participation
• List of cultural events and research and  academic symposiums

Core Component 2.C speaks to the operations of the Board of Trustees.  It is expected that decisions be made autonomously and in the best interest of the institution.  These decisions should be in compliance with our BOT policies, ensuring the integrity of the College.  Part of BOT operations is the delegation of day-to-day management of the College to the Administration with the expectation that the Faculty provide oversight of academic or curricular matters.  Evidence for our Assurance Argument might include:

• BOT policies and bylaws, including a conflict of interest policy
• List and bios of our BOT members
• Documentation of the selection process for board members and for selection of chair, vice- chair, etc.
• Dates, agendas and minutes of BOT meetings for multiple years (and town hall or community meetings with the board)
• On-boarding and orientation process for new  BOT members
• Information about professional development and training for BOT members
• BOT approval of planning and budgeting documents
• BOT selection, evaluation, and right to terminate president of institution
• BOT self-evaluation

Core Component 2.D assesses our commitment to academic freedom and freedom of expression in the pursuit of truth in both teaching and learning.  This particular Core Component of all 18 embedded in the five Criteria is the most general with no clarifying sub-components.  It is fairly easy to define however and, perhaps, done so with the list of typical evidence.  This evidence might include:

• Our learning principles or objectives (e.g., institutional)
• Listing of activities supported and sponsored by NCMC that allow for a discussion of varying views and opinions
• NCMC policy on freedom of expression and/or  academic freedom
• Our course listing including the range of options for general education courses
• College policies and procedures for peaceful assembly  of students
• A statement on censorship

Finally, Core Component 2.E assesses our policies and procedures related to faculty, staff, and student acquisition, discovery, and application of knowledge and the responsible nature of this work.  This includes guidance on research and academic honesty and integrity.  Evidence may include:

• Our academic integrity policy
• Training and other resources supporting an understanding of plagiarism, citations, etc.
• Related College policies and procedures if student or employee handbooks

As with Criterion 1 discussed last week, NCMC meets the intent of the accreditation standards presented in Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct.  The final draft Assurance Argument for Criterion 2 and collection of associated evidence are near completion.  We plan to share drafts for both Criteria 1 and 2 in early August 2024.

JUNE 6, 2024

As mentioned in an earlier Met…Together e-mail, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) Criteria for Accreditation –  https://www.hlcommission.org/Policies/criteria-and-core-components.html – serve as the acceptable accreditation standards for us as an institution and include:

• Criterion 1. Mission
• Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
• Criterion 3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support
• Criterion 4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
• Criterion 5: Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning

From a sequencing perspective, it makes complete sense to start with a College’s mission as this will drive alignment with the standards presented in the remaining four Criteria.  Each Criterion has a number of more defined Core Components that provide further structure and clarity to the overarching Criterion.

Criterion 1 focuses on our mission by assessing the clearness and public articulation of this guiding institutional statement.  There are three Core Components providing direction for this mission assessment.  As we write our Assurance Argument, the College will address each Core Component individually while providing documentary evidence to support the argument.

The first – Core Component 1.A – states: “The institution’s mission is articulated publicly and operationalized throughout the institution.”  NCMC’s mission is “To provide exceptional, accessible, relevant higher education to the benefit of all.”  Our supporting vision is “To become the premier student-centered college, as partners on the learning journey.”  As an institution, we accomplish this through shared core values of Excellence, Integrity, Results, Stewardship, Compassion, and Inclusion.  Evidentiary documents and other material for this Core Component might include:

• The history, development, and adoption of our mission statement
• Regular review of the mission by administration and governing board approval
• How our academic programs, student support services, and planning and budgeting processes align with our mission and strategic plan
• Information about where the mission statement, purpose, vision, values, plans and goals are located and their accessibility to staff, faculty, students and the general public

The second core component – Core Component 1.B – states: “The institution’s mission demonstrates commitment to the public good.”  In simple terms, our educational responsibilities – whether these be transfer, CTE, workforce training, or community education – are our primary responsibilities and, as such, should serve the public.  A primary means for accomplishing this is through engagement with our external constituencies and responding to their needs when possible.  Evidence here might include:

• Actions and decisions demonstrating how the College serves the public through our educational roles and responsibilities
• Our mission documents addressing our role in the community
• Programs and certificates meeting community or constituent needs
• Local business and organization partnerships
• Our public events and series open to the community
• Community use of our facilities
• Faculty, staff and student engagement in the community

The third and final Core Component of Criterion 1 – Core Component 1.C – states: “The institution provides opportunities for civic engagement in a diverse, multicultural society and globally connected world, as appropriate within its mission and for the constituencies it serves.”  As an institution, this component focuses on how we encourage both curricular and co-curricular activities in preparing our students to become informed citizens and successful in the workplace.  Evidence here might include:

• Courses and programs promoting civic engagement – e.g., capstone experiences, service projects, professional or clinical practicums
• Residential life service or experience – e.g., service clubs, athletic team service activities, volunteer experiences
• How diversity and inclusion are addressed in our mission documents and strategic plan
• Student demographics and enrollment strategies that demonstrate a focus on diversity and inclusion
• List of on-campus centers, offices and committees that address societal diversity, inclusion, and/or global awareness
• List of student organizations that support societal diversity, inclusion, and/or global awareness
• Activities that we host or participate in that emphasize diversity, inclusion, and/or global awareness

Rest assured that NCMC fully meets Criterion 1. Mission and its three Core Components.  A group of colleagues from across the institution are at this moment finalizing the draft Assurance Argument for Criterion 1 and collecting the documentary evidence supporting it.  When the draft is finalized and reviewed, the College will share it internally.

MAY 30, 2024

NCMC participates in the Open Pathway for accreditation: https://www.hlcommission.org/Accreditation/open-overview.html .  The other pathway option is the Standard Pathway.  Our March 10–11, 2025 marks Year 10: Comprehensive Evaluation for Reaffirmation of our Open Pathway journey.

As our March 2025 HLC Comprehensive Evaluation (https://www.hlcommission.org/Accreditation/comprehensive-evaluation.html) approaches, the College must write and submit a thorough self-reflection report known as the Assurance Argument.  This argument will demonstrate how NCMC meets the five HLC Criteria for Accreditation along with the 18 embedded Core Components.  This document is designed to show peer reviewers and others how each Core Component within each Criterion is met.

Along with the Assurance Argument, we will also include evidence supporting these Core Component statements.  All evidence will be consolidated into a single Evidence File.  Each piece of evidence will be electronically embedded into the Assurance Argument where it is referenced in the text.  The entire Assurance Argument and Evidence File are uploaded electronically into the HLC Assurance System, allowing our peer reviewers and HLC staff access to all of the material 30 days prior to our March 2025 HLC Comprehensive Evaluation Visit.  The argument and evidence undergo an Assurance Review as part of this Year 10 visit:  https://www.hlcommission.org/Accreditation/assurance-review.html .

Along with the other components of a comprehensive evaluation noted in the link above, we will also have a Federal Compliance Review: https://www.hlcommission.org/Accreditation/federal-compliance-program.html

Needless to say, there is a tremendous amount of work necessary to complete the required preparation and documentation for the Assurance Review, Federal Compliance Review, and the actual Comprehensive Evaluation Visit(https://www.hlcommission.org/Accreditation/comprehensive-evaluation-visit.html ).  The College is already well on its way to completing a first draft of the Assurance Argument.  Completing it months ahead of the March 2025 visit will allow us to thoughtfully update the document as we hit future milestones in important areas such as assessment, program review, and professional development.

There is a lot of information in this e-mail; however, each link should provide clarity for each particular step in the process.

To summarize:

• NCMC participates in the HLC Open Pathway
• As part of Year 10 of the Open Pathway, NCMC will undergo a Comprehensive Evaluation that includes:
• Assurance Review (requiring us to write an Assurance Argument explaining how we meet the HLC Criteria for Accreditation and the associated Core Components, including required Evidence)
• Federal Compliance Review (requiring us to complete a report)
• Onsite peer review visit (this is our March 10–11, 2025 Comprehensive Evaluation Visit)

In the next Met…Together communication, we will begin to review each Criterion and associated Core Components.

MAY 23, 2024

Why is accreditation so important?  This is a frequently asked question that is often answered generally.

There are both institutional accreditations and specialized/programmatic accreditations.  Our Comprehensive Evaluation Visit by HLC on March 10-11, 2025, is to reaffirm the College’s institutional accreditation.  NCMC also has programs with specialized accreditations – for example, our ADN (RN) program recently received initial accreditation from the Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing (ACEN) and our EMS–Paramedic program was recently awarded continuing accreditation from the Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP).  The state of Michigan also recently approved the College as a training site for certified nurse aides (CNA); although not specifically an accreditation, without this state approval, CNA students would not be eligible for licensure.

The U.S. Department of Education equates accreditation with acceptable standards of educational quality provided by colleges and universities.  Through these standards, accreditation touches every aspect of the College.  One great example is financial aid for our students – for the 2022-2023 academic year, 56% of all undergraduate degree/certificate seeking students at NCMC were awarded Pell grants.  Federal financial aid is tied to institutional accreditation status.  Other state and federal grant opportunities also require that the institution be accredited.  You can quickly see, without institutional accreditation, a college or university cannot effectively function, leading to the inability to recruit, educate and retain students.  Without this accreditation, it also limits our ability to attract and retain faculty and staff.

North Central’s institutional accrediting agency is the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) – https://www.hlcommission.org/.  The HLC Criteria for Accreditation –  https://www.hlcommission.org/Policies/criteria-and-core-components.html – serve as the acceptable standards for us as an institution:

• Criterion 1. Mission
• Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
• Criterion 3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support
• Criterion 4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
• Criterion 5: Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning

Within these five criteria are 18 core components that provide greater detail and definition.  These criteria and core components are the areas we address in our self-reflection – commonly referred to as the Assurance Argument – that we will submit to HLC (in February 2025), ahead of the Comprehensive Evaluation Visit in March 2025.  HLC does not dictate how to address each criterion and core component, but rather defines the standards necessary to ensure the quality of teaching and learning supported and provided.

MAY 17, 2024

Over the next several months – just less than 10 to be exact – the College will communicate in a variety of ways, the importance of NCMC’s HLC accreditation.  This is in preparation for our March 10-11, 2025 HLC Comprehensive Evaluation Visit leading to the reaffirmation of our accreditation.  In communicating this importance, we will share in details on the HLC Criteria for Accreditation and how NCMC meets the criteria.

Methods of Communication

1. Weekly Met…Together e-mails – the Met…Together naming of the e-mails will become our slogan during the build-up to our March 2025 visit
2. There are typically three outcomes for each of the criteria during an HLC Comprehensive Evaluation Visit – (1) Met, (2) Met with Concerns (often requiring interim monitoring and reporting), and (3) Not Met
3. Hence, our slogan – Met…Together – with all of us working together our Comprehensive Evaluation Visit outcomes will be nothing but MET! 

1. A comprehensive brochure that will serve as a resource for important information about our work at the College and the relationship of this work to the accreditation criteria
2. Detailed presentations during Welcome Back Weeks in Fall 2024 and Winter 2025 semesters
3. An internal repository – likely on Sharepoint – to share drafts and final versions of our Assurance Argument (explaining how we meet the HLC Criteria for Accreditation) and accompanying evidence files supporting the argument
4. Mock Visits – basically demonstration meetings that will simulate the various breakout sessions the peer review team will hold during the March 2025 visit
5. A gathering the afternoon/evening of Wednesday, March 12, 2025 (after the 5-7 person peer review team leaves), to celebrate the completion of our latest 10-year accreditation cycle for the College and NCMC’s attainment of “Met” for all the criteria

Each of you at the College has a role in our success as an accredited higher education institution.  A primary goal of this communication strategy over the next 10 months is to provide the information for everyone to realize these roles and connections.