[ skip to content ]

Reaffirmation Process Overview

The Process of Accreditation

The process for initial and continued accreditation involves a collective analysis and judgment by the institution's internal constituencies, an informed review by peers external to the institution, and a reasoned decision by the elected members of the Commission on Colleges. Accredited institutions periodically conduct internal reviews involving their administrative officers, staffs, faculties, students, trustees, and others appropriate to the process. The internal review allows an institution to consider its effectiveness in achieving its stated mission, its compliance with the Commission's accreditation requirements, its efforts in enhancing the quality of student learning and the quality of programs and services offered to its constituencies, and its success in accomplishing its mission. At the culmination of the internal review, peer evaluators representing the Commission apply their professional judgment through a preliminary assessment of the institution; elected Board Members make the final determination of an institution’s compliance with the accreditation requirements.

Application of the Requirements

The Commission on Colleges bases its accreditation of degree-granting higher education institutions and entities on requirements in the Principles of Accreditation: Foundations for Quality Enhancement. These requirements apply to all institutional programs and services, wherever located or however delivered. The Commission on Colleges applies the requirements of its Principles to all applicant, candidate, and member institutions, regardless of the type of institution: private for-profit, private not-for-profit, or public.

The Commission evaluates an institution and makes accreditation decisions based on the following:

  • Compliance with the Principle of Integrity (Section 1)
  • Compliance with the Core Requirements (Section 2)
  • Compliance with the Comprehensive Standards (Section 3)
  • Compliance with additional Federal Requirements (Section 4)
  • Compliance with the policies of the Commission on Colleges (See Appendix for definition, description, and reference to policies. Access the Commission's Web page: www.sacscoc.org.)

Components of the Review Process

The Commission conducts several types of institutional reviews: (1) Candidate Committee reviews of institutions seeking candidacy, (2) Accreditation Committee reviews of institutions seeking initial membership, (3) Reaffirmation Committee reviews of institutions seeking continued accreditation following a comprehensive review, (4) Special Committee reviews of institutions seeking continued accreditation following evaluation of institutional circumstances that are accreditation related, and (5) Substantive Change Committee reviews of institutions seeking approval and continued accreditation following the review of a change of a significant modification or expansion to the institution's nature and scope. Each of the above types of reviews has its own evaluation documents and peer review procedures and, except for item 3 dealing with reaffirmation, can be found on the Commission's Web site: www.sacscoc.org.


The process described below is specific to an institution seeking reaffirmation of accreditation.

Preparation by the Institution

As part of the reaffirmation process, the institution will provide two separate documents.

1. Compliance Certification

The Compliance Certification, submitted approximately fifteen months in advance of an institution's scheduled reaffirmation, is a document completed by the institution that demonstrates its judgment of the extent of its compliance with each of the Core Requirements, Comprehensive Standards, and Federal Requirements. Signatures by the institution's chief executive officer and accreditation liaison are required to certify compliance. By signing the document, the individuals certify that the process of institutional selfassessment has been thorough, honest, and forthright, and that the information contained in the document is truthful, accurate, and complete.

2. Quality Enhancement Plan

The Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP), submitted four to six weeks in advance of the on-site review by the Commission, is a document developed by the institution that (1) includes a process identifying key issues emerging from institutional assessment, (2) focuses on learning outcomes and/or the environment supporting student learning and accomplishing the mission of the institution, (3) demonstrates institutional capability for the initiation, implementation, and completion of the QEP, (4) includes broad-based involvement of institutional constituencies in the development and proposed implementation of the QEP, and (5) identifies goals and a plan to assess their achievement. The QEP should be focused and succinct (no more than seventy-five pages of narrative text and no more than twenty-five pages of supporting documentation or charts, graphs, and tables).

The preceding was taken from the Principles of Accreditation: Foundations for Quality Enhancement (2010 Edition), available at http://www.sacscoc.org/principles.asp.