Middle States reaffirmation of accreditation process gets underway

Ellie Fogarty, vice president for institutional field relations for the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), held an open session on campus Tuesday to explain the accreditation and self-study process as Binghamton University moves through the steps to reaffirmation of its accreditation. The last time the University reaffirmed its accreditation was in 2010, when Fogarty was also the campus liaison for the process.

As MSCHE liaison, she will shepherd the campus through the process until the site visit in fall 2020 by a team of peer evaluators.

Fogarty had already met with President Harvey Stenger, members of the Steering Committee and the Binghamton University Council, as well as leaders in academic affairs, the Faculty Senate and the Professional Staff Senate prior to the packed open session.

The University’s 17-member Steering Committee will be co-chaired by Pamela Smart, associate professor of art history; Michael McGoff, senior vice provost and chief financial officer; and Nasrin Fatima, associate provost for institutional research, effectiveness and planning. Seven working groups of eight to 13 members will each focus on one of the MSCHE seven standards for the campus self-study.

“This is a year-long process and it will take a village, but you clearly have a lot of people involved,” she said, before she asked why the campus would even go through the process.

“At the philosophical level, why engage in this over such a long period of time and what are the benefits?” she asked. “It is a good way to do an assessment and take a look at where you are.

“Other reasons? To know where you’re going and to have a plan of action,” she said. “It seems as though you do this all the time so you’re well poised to chart your future. It allows you to reflect on opportunities for improvement and innovation and eight years later, in next cycle, you can see where you were trying to go and look back to see how you have made progress.”

Bottom-line reasons for pursuing reaffirmation of the University’s accreditation are financial, Fogarty said. “Without reaccreditation, students are not eligible for Pell grants or federal loans, and faculty are not eligible to apply for federal grants and other funding.

“When there’s free money, there is always the potential for fraud and abuse, so MSCHE is the mechanism by which the federal government inserts itself,” she said.

Fogarty said the reaccreditation process allows us to look at our mission to see if we are who we say we are. “That’s what you need to study,” she said. ”Look at your Road Map and institutional and strategic priorities and how they meet Middle States standards and report it to us.”

The University will collect evidence and track metrics over the next year and hand the self-study to a team of external, peer reviewers and evaluators who will confirm and clarify what is in the self-study, and reflect it back to the campus, Fogarty said. “It’s collegial, not an audit or investigation,” she said. “These evaluators will be from peer institutions, not competitors on multiple levels and there will not be anyone from the SUNY or CUNY systems.”

Peer review is very suspect by the public, but it’s embedded in higher education and that’s why it works so well, Fogarty said. “This is what they do all the time, so be reassured that all peer evaluators adhere to a code of conduct and sign a conflict-of-interest document.”

The MSCHE accreditation is separate from professional accreditation, though Binghamton’s professional schools and several programs are accredited by other accrediting bodies, Fogarty said.

When the site visit by evaluators takes place in fall 2020, the team will write a report, the University will write an institutional response to it, clarifying or adding information, and the full report then goes to the MSCHE Commission Committee, Fogarty said. “Then it goes to the full commission for a decision and you will know the decision in March 2021.”

There are three non-compliance statuses, Fogarty explained. Warning, probation or show cause. “Accreditation continues but it is very precarious and may be in jeopardy in these cases,” she said, “and it has an immediate effect on bond ratings, donors and every other professional accreditation you have. Warning and probation are not necessarily a death knell, but a huge wakeup call. And you would have to show cause for why you should be renewed if you’re in that status.”

On the positive side, Fogarty said that in the team report an institution wants to hear that it appears to meet the standards seven times. “You will not get bored hearing that,” she said. “And if you do hear that, the team might also identify some exemplary practices and give some collegial advice.”

Peer reviewers receive only $50 for their service, but expenses are covered and they learn so much when they return to their own institutions, Fogarty said, before wrapping up the open session with a plea for volunteers.

“We’re searching for volunteers! If interested and would like to serve, your team not only will have a president or provost for your team chair, but there will be a CFO, faculty, someone with assessment expertise and someone with distance education expertise in line with where the institution is,” she said. “They’re assigned the standards and are focused on their standards when writing up their findings to be in the one team report. And they come to consensus for final status for an institution.”