ACCREDITATION

HANDBOOK
POLICIES, PROCEDURES,
STANDARDS AND GUIDES
OF THE DISTANCE EDUCATION
ACCREDITING COMMISSION

APRIL 5 2022
 DEAC Accreditation Handbook
Copyright ©20 by the Distance Education Accrediting Commission.
All rights reserved.

Published by the: Distance Education Accrediting Commission

1101 17th Street, NW, Suite 808
Washington, D.C. 20036
202 234-5100
www.deac.org

First Edition: January 1990

Edition:

The Distance Education Accrediting Commission is listed by the United States Department of
Education as a recognized institutional accrediting agency for distance education. The DEAC is
also recognized by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). The U.S.
Department of Education and CHEA recognition is for postsecondary educational institutions
only.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART ONE: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 4
PURPOSE OF THE ACCREDITATION HANDBOOK .......................................................................................................... 4
ABOUT DEAC............................................................................................................................................................ 4
WHAT IS DISTANCE EDUCATION? .............................................................................................................................. 5
WHY BECOME ACCREDITED?..................................................................................................................................... 6
WHAT IS DEAC ACCREDITATION AND WHAT ARE ITS BENEFITS? ............................................................................ 7
FOR STUDENTS, DEAC ACCREDITATION… ............................................................................................................... 7
FOR INSTITUTIONS, DEAC ACCREDITATION… .......................................................................................................... 7
FOR THE PUBLIC, DEAC ACCREDITATION… ............................................................................................................. 8
FOR GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY PROFESSIONALS, DEAC ACCREDITATION… ...................................................... 8
DEAC TODAY ........................................................................................................................................................... 8
RECOGNITION BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ....................................................................... 9
RECOGNITION BY THE COUNCIL FOR HIGHER EDUCATION ACCREDITATION (CHEA) ............................................... 9

PART TWO: PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES ............................................................................................. 10

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 10
I. ACCREDITATION PROCESS FOR FIRST-TIME APPLICANTS; INITIAL TRAINING ....................................................... 12
II. ACCREDITATION PROCESS FOR APPLICANTS FOR RENEWAL OF ACCREDITATION................................................ 13
III. APPLICATION FOR INITIAL ACCREDITATION OR ACCREDITATION RENEWAL; DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY ......... 13
IV. SELF-EVALUATION AND READINESS ASSESSMENT (FIRST TIME APPLICANTS ONLY) ........................................ 16
V. FULL ACCREDITATION EVALUATION PROCESS.................................................................................................... 18
VI. PETITIONS AND WAIVERS................................................................................................................................... 21
VII. CONSIDERATION OF THIRD-PARTY INFORMATION ............................................................................................ 22
VIII. ON-SITE EVALUATION..................................................................................................................................... 23
IX. COMMISSION ACTIONS ON INITIAL AND RENEWAL OF ACCREDITATION ............................................................ 24
X. ACTIONS AVAILABLE TO COMMISSION DURING AN ACCREDITATION TERM ....................................................... 29
XI. DEFINITIONS RELATING TO COMMISSION ACTIONS ........................................................................................... 31
XII. APPEALING A COMMISSION’S ADVERSE DECISION ........................................................................................... 32
XIII. BINDING ARBITRATION ................................................................................................................................... 36
XIV. RECORD KEEPING AND CONFIDENTIALITY ...................................................................................................... 37
XV. NOTIFICATION AND INFORMATION SHARING BY DEAC ................................................................................... 39
XVI. PUBLIC DISCLOSURES BY INSTITUTION ........................................................................................................... 42
XVII. INTERIM MONITORING OF ACCREDITED INSTITUTIONS .................................................................................. 43
XVIII. SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES ............................................................................................................................... 47
XIX. PROCESS WITH RESPECT TO EACH SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE ............................................................................. 50
XX. NON-SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES .......................................................................................................................... 68
XXI. TEACH-OUT PLANS ......................................................................................................................................... 72
XXII. COMPLAINTS (ACCREDITED INSTITUTIONS, ACTIVE APPLICANTS, AND DEAC) ............................................ 76
XXIII. REVIEWING, ADOPTING AND CIRCULATING CHANGES TO THE ACCREDITATION HANDBOOK....................... 82

PART THREE: ACCREDITATION STANDARDS ............................................................................................. 86

I. INSTITUTIONAL MISSION....................................................................................................................................... 87
II. INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS AND STRATEGIC PLANNING .............................................................................. 88
III. PROGRAM OUTCOMES, CURRICULA, AND MATERIALS ....................................................................................... 86
IV. EDUCATIONAL AND STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES ............................................................................................. 95
V. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND SATISFACTION ..................................................................................................... 98
VI. ACADEMIC LEADERSHIP AND FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS ................................................................................. 99
VII. ADVERTISING, PROMOTIONAL LITERATURE, AND RECRUITMENT PERSONNEL ............................................... 102
 VIII. ADMISSION PRACTICES AND ENROLLMENT AGREEMENTS ............................................................................ 105
IX. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES, CANCELLATIONS, AND REFUND POLICIES .............................................................. 110
X. INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE .......................................................................................................................... 114
XI. FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ............................................................................................................................ 116
XII. FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES, RECORD PROTECTION AND RETENTION .................................................. 118

PART FOUR: APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 120

I. CONFLICT OF INTEREST....................................................................................................................................... 121
II. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE FORM ...................................................................................................... 124
III. CODE OF CONDUCT FOR ON-SITE EVALUATORS .............................................................................................. 126
IV. SELECTING AND TRAINING COMMISSIONERS ................................................................................................... 128
V. SELECTING AND TRAINING EVALUATORS.......................................................................................................... 132
VI. SELECTING AND TRAINING APPEALS PANEL MEMBERS ................................................................................... 137
VII. OBLIGATIONS OF ACCREDITATION.................................................................................................................. 140
VIII. DEAC CODE OF ETHICS FOR STUDENT RECRUITMENT PERSONNEL .............................................................. 142
IX. ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................ 144
X. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT BENCHMARKS ........................................................................................................... 146
XI. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND SATISFACTION .................................................................................................. 147
XII. PILOT PROGRAMS ........................................................................................................................................... 150
XIII. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WARRANT WAIVERS OF DEAC STANDARDS & PROCEDURES ................... 152
XIII. GLOSSARY ..................................................................................................................................................... 153
PART ONE: INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE OF THE ACCREDITATION HANDBOOK
DEAC has prepared this Accreditation Handbook to assist institutions in understanding and
preparing for evaluation by DEAC. The Accreditation Handbook is composed of Four Parts.
Part One provides an introduction to the concept of accreditation, the history and current mission
of DEAC, and the value of DEAC accreditation to educational institutions, students, and the
public. Part Two sets forth the primary procedures and policies which govern the DEAC
accreditation process. Part Three sets forth DEAC’s twelve accreditation standards. Institutions
must comply in full with each of these standards in order to earn accreditation from DEAC. Part
Four includes certain specific forms and policies. Additional forms and policies which may be
referenced in this Accreditation Handbook can be found on DEAC’s website (www.deac.org) or
by request from DEAC. Please note: Institutions should always check the website for the most
up-to-date versions of these documents.

Institutions interested in pursuing DEAC accreditation should use this Accreditation Handbook
as they organize and conduct their self-evaluations, as they evaluate their readiness to meet the
rigors inherent in voluntary accreditation, and as they work to maintain the standards of DEAC.
The Accreditation Handbook also offers guidance to newly established distance education
institutions seeking to build or refine their policies and practices, whether or not they apply for
DEAC accreditation.

ABOUT DEAC
Accreditation in education began over a century ago. The movement started as a public reaction
to the extreme differences between educational institutions that initially appeared to be similar.
Accrediting bodies were voluntarily organized by educators to develop and implement common
standards and procedures to measure educational quality. From its inception, accreditation has
been a nongovernmental, completely voluntary, peer group method of identifying educational
institutions or programs that meet published standards of quality. A variety of regional, national,
and professional accrediting organizations came into being in the early 1900s in response to the
public’s demand for reliable indicators of institutional quality.

The federally recognized accrediting organization now known as Distance Education Accrediting
Commission (DEAC) has its roots in a non-profit organization of distance learning institutions
founded in 1926 under the name “National Home Study Council” (NHSC) to promote education
quality and ethical business practices for correspondence education programs. In 1955, NHSC
established a standing committee, known as the Accrediting Commission, consisting of
representatives from its member organizations, to create and implement written accreditation
standards and procedures to examine and approve distance learning institutions. In 1959, DEAC
received its first grant of federal recognition and was listed by the U.S. Commissioner (now
Secretary) of Education as a recognized accreditor. In 1994, the National Home Study Council
changed its name to the Distance Education and Training Council reflecting the expansion and
increasing diversity of distance learning programs. In 2015, the organization’s name was

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 4
rebranded as the Distance Education Accrediting Commission to reflect its primary function as
an independent accrediting organization.

DEAC’s Board of Directors, in addition to providing its traditional role of overseeing the
business and corporate governance of DEAC, also serves as DEAC’s accrediting commission
(the “Commission”). In that capacity, it is responsible for making final decisions as to whether
an institution should be granted accreditation or reaccreditation or should have its accreditation
withdrawn. The Commission is also responsible for making all material decisions relating to an
institution’s accreditation, including, by way of example, (i) the implementation of enforcement
actions with respect to institutions which appear to have fallen out of compliance with DEAC
standards, and (ii) the approval or withholding of approval of substantive changes which may be
requested by an institution. It applies its standards and policies in a manner that respects the
mission of an institution, including those with faith-based or religious missions, to ensure and
advance the aim of institutional improvement and effectiveness. The vision and mission of the
DEAC are as follows:

VISION
The Distance Education Accrediting Commission is the preeminent accrediting
organization for distance education delivered worldwide that sets high standards for
academic quality, inspiring excellence in teaching, learning, and student outcomes
through voluntary assessment and peer review.

MISSION
Assuring students high quality distance education through accreditation, peer review, and
institutional improvement.

WHAT IS DISTANCE EDUCATION?

Distance education, also known as online education, correspondence education, or Internet-based
learning, is designed for learners who live at a distance from residential educational providers
and/or institutions. Distance education has evolved in recent years to include an increasing
number of adult learners who may be within reasonable proximity to a residential campus, but
because of work and personal responsibilities, are unable to regularly attend a physical campus.
Additionally, these adult learners consider themselves to be self-starters and more independent
students who thrive in an environment that provides a balance between flexibility and structure.

Distance education has a rich history dating back to the early 18th century when its predominant
medium of instruction was printed materials that were mailed to individual students and allowed
for little to no interaction with faculty members. Distance education today has taken advantage
of technological innovations and has become a multi-faceted avenue for providing instruction
through various mediums to meet the learning needs of a diverse, growing student population.
Educational institutions can reach across borders and extend globally to build strong learner
communities through the use of technological tools such as social media outlets, podcasts,
various forms of asynchronous and synchronous communication, and videoconferencing.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 5
Advancements within the field of distance education have provided an increasing population of
students the opportunity to earn degrees and gain knowledge and skills in various subject areas.

For institutions participating in Federal Student Assistance programs, the U.S. Department of
Education defines distance education as education that uses one or more of the technologies
listed in paragraphs (1) through (4) of this definition to deliver instruction to students who are
separated from the instructor or instructors, and to support regular and substantive interaction
between the students and the instructor or instructors, either synchronously or asynchronously.
The technologies that may be used to offer distance education include —
1. The internet;
2. One-way and two-way transmissions through open broadcast, closed circuit,
cable, microwave, broadband lines, fiber optics, satellite, or wireless
communications devices;
3. Audio conferencing; or
4. Other media used in a course in conjunction with any of the technologies listed
in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this definition.
For purposes of this definition, an instructor is an individual responsible for delivering course
content and who meets the qualifications for instruction established by the institution’s
accrediting agency.

Based on this definition by the U.S. Department of Education, institutions that deliver instruction
through correspondence education are not eligible to participate in federal student aid.
Correspondence education, as defined by the U.S. Department of Education, “means:

1) Education provided through one or more courses by an institution under which the
institution provides instructional materials, by mail or electronic transmission, including
examinations on the materials, to students who are separated from the instructor;
2) Interaction between the instructor and the student is limited, is not regular and
substantive, and is primarily initiated by the student;
3) Correspondence courses are typically self-paced; and
4) Correspondence education is not distance education.”

DEAC limits eligibility to participate in Federal Student Assistance programs to institutions that
demonstrate substantive interaction between the students and instructor/faculty. DEAC’s scope
of accreditation extends to both distance education and correspondence education institutions.

For the purposes of the DEAC Accreditation Handbook, the term “distance education” is used
throughout, whether the instructional model is correspondence, online, or direct assessment.

WHY BECOME ACCREDITED?

Accreditation communicates quality to students, institutions, the public, government, and other
industry professionals. Accreditation provides assurances that a program has met established
standards necessary to produce graduates who have achieved stated learning outcomes and are
ready to enter the global marketplace. Students who graduate from accredited institutions have
greater opportunities for employment, continued education, and mobility.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 6
Generally, accreditation in other countries is controlled by the government and is often required.
By contrast, accreditation in the United States is a voluntary, peer review process and is carried
out by nongovernmental, nonprofit organizations. The peer review process allows institutions to
be evaluated by other education professionals working in the industry who understand the needs
and demands from a shared perspective. Additionally, the peer-review process provides checks
and balances from within the industry to allow institutions to have an opportunity to meet
students’ educational goals by using a variety of resources while ensuring quality programs.

WHAT IS DEAC ACCREDITATION AND WHAT ARE ITS BENEFITS?

DEAC’s accreditation standards and accreditation evaluation and oversight process were
specifically designed to meet the unique quality assurance needs of distance education
institutions. The standards establish education quality expectations and assess an institution’s
ability to integrate technology to meet the needs of 21st century graduates and employers. DEAC
standards are designed to accommodate the need for institutions to explore learning resources
and student support services beyond those of traditional campus-based institutions. Additionally,
DEAC accreditation recognizes that, by meeting the unique needs of the distance learning
student, course and program delivery can expand an institution’s reach beyond a regional focus
to a national and international presence. When accredited distance education institutions are
successful, students can benefit, regardless of geographic location, and can organize their studies
to fit within personal life commitments.

DEAC-accredited institutions are primarily degree-granting institutions offering programs that

award credentials through the doctoral level. However, they also include high school programs,
career training certificate programs, and a range of educational program supporting ongoing
learning. Students can choose the institutions that best meet their needs while being provided
assurances that the chosen program has been required to comply with the precise and rigorous
standards mandated by this Accreditation Handbook.

FOR STUDENTS, DEAC ACCREDITATION…

Provides students with confidence that the institution offering programs ranging from
high school through the professional doctoral degree and non-degree certificates has been
evaluated and meets rigorous standards established by education industry professionals.
Increases and enhances employment opportunities for students who graduate from an
accredited institution. Graduates want assurances that, upon completion of the program,
they have the requisite knowledge and skills to meet their educational goals.
Verifies that the unique methods for delivering curricula are consistent with educational
best practices and provides students with assurances that the education they are paying
for is valuable and worth their time, money, and effort.
Allows institutions to prepare students, by supporting their achievement of knowledge,
skills, and abilities, to be productive individuals who contribute to their community and
continue lifelong learning.

FOR INSTITUTIONS, DEAC ACCREDITATION…

Allows an institution to receive public recognition for the quality programs and services

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 7
 offered to students.
Promotes the integration and continuous improvement of “best practices” in support of
student achievement and institutional growth.
Documents that an institution is true to its mission, goals, and objectives by measuring
the achievement of each for purposes of continuous self-assessment.
Allows institutions to be eligible for and apply for various professional and programmatic
accreditations.
Allows institutions the option of participating in Federal Student Assistance and military
programs to benefit students in need of financial assistance to realize their educational
goals.
Allows institutions to apply for approval in some states that only allow accredited
institutions.

FOR THE PUBLIC, DEAC ACCREDITATION…

Provides a consistent and reliable indicator that institutions meet standards of quality and
provides validation of credibility through a structured peer review process.
Promotes accountability to other member institutions and various stakeholders.
Supports and encourages the innovation and use of technology by emphasizing
continuous improvement processes to ensure that institutions and graduates can compete
in a global economy.

FOR GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY PROFESSIONALS, DEAC ACCREDITATION…

Provides an opportunity for industry professionals to offer input and observations that
reflect current and future employment needs in a changing global economy.
Demonstrates to various federal and state regulators that accredited institutions are
leaders in the field of distance education and strive to prepare a workforce equipped to
contribute to the changing economic landscape.
Provides the opportunity for member institutions to lead the change necessary in the field
of education by offering students the chance to increase their knowledge and skills while
meeting their personal and professional responsibilities.

DEAC TODAY
The DEAC is recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education and by the Council for Higher
Education Accreditation (CHEA) as an institutional accrediting organization for postsecondary
distance education institutions that offer programs primarily by the distance education method at
the levels of non-degree, high school, postsecondary, and higher education, including the
professional doctoral degree.

DEAC’s goals are to assure a high standard of educational quality in the distance education
institutions it accredits by requiring compliance with its published standards and procedures and
by fostering continual self-improvement. DEAC is dedicated to ensuring a quality education for
more than two million students who annually study at its accredited institutions.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 8
RECOGNITION BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
DEAC initially received federal recognition in 1959 and has continually held recognition by the
United States Department of Education ever since. Federal recognition aims to ensure that
accreditors meet expectations for institutional and program participation in federal activities,
such as federal financial aid programs. Currently, the federal recognition process is largely
carried out by the National Advisory Committee for Institutional Quality and Integrity
(NACIQI). The NACIQI provides recommendations to the United States Secretary of Education
concerning whether accreditation standards are sufficiently rigorous and effective toward
ensuring that a recognized accreditor is a reliable authority regarding the quality of the education
provided by the institutions it accredits. In 2022, NACIQI recommended to the Secretary of
Education that DEAC receive recognition through 2027. DEAC’s scope of recognition by the
Secretary of Education is:

The accreditation of postsecondary institutions in the United States that offer degree and/or non-
degree programs primarily by the distance or correspondence education method, including
through direct assessment, up to and including the professional doctoral degree, including those
institutions that are specifically certified by the agency as accredited for Federal Student
Assistance program purposes.

RECOGNITION BY THE COUNCIL FOR HIGHER EDUCATION ACCREDITATION (CHEA)

CHEA was formed in 1996 by presidents of United States colleges and universities to
demonstrate higher education quality through strengthened accreditation processes. It promotes
academic quality through formal recognition of higher education accrediting bodies and works to
advance self-regulation in higher education through accreditation. Recognition by CHEA affirms
that the standards and procedures of accrediting organizations meet the academic quality,
institutional improvement, and accountability expectations CHEA has established. DEAC first
received recognition by CHEA in 2001. It received its most recent grant of recognition from
CHEA in 2013 through 2023. DEAC’s scope of recognition by CHEA is:

The accreditation of higher learning institutions in the United States and international locations
that offer programs of study that are delivered primarily by distance (51 percent or more) and
award credentials at the associate, baccalaureate, master’s, first professional and professional
doctoral degree level.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 9
PART TWO: PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES

INTRODUCTION

Part Two of the Distance Education Accrediting Commission (DEAC) Accreditation Handbook
is intended to set forth the procedural framework that institutions seeking accreditation from
DEAC are required to follow. It also includes a description of the primary documents and
information an institution will be expected to submit in order to demonstrate compliance with
DEAC accreditation standards (found in Part Three of the DEAC Accreditation Handbook).
Please note that, although the process of evaluation for accreditation is comprehensive and
thorough for both initial applicants and those institutions seeking a renewal of their accreditation,
the process for a new applicant includes additional steps and requirements, including an initial
assessment of “readiness.”

Part Two also sets forth (1) the supplemental process required for institutions seeking to be
certified by DEAC as eligible to participate in Title IV programs and (2) the primary forms of
interim monitoring that DEAC has established to ensure and support ongoing compliance with
its accreditation standards.

Unless otherwise indicated below, all applicable forms and fees associated with the accreditation
process, including those involved in mid-term monitoring of accredited institutions and/or
supplemental processes such as an application for Title IV eligibility certification, can be found
on DEAC’s website.

Application for accreditation, reaccreditation, or Title IV eligibility certification is wholly

voluntary. For institutions who elect to proceed along any of these paths, DEAC offers training
and detailed written guidance. DEAC staff also welcome questions from institutions on the
process, procedures, and forms at any time

Five Important Notes on DEAC’s Accreditation Processes and Procedures

1. The decisions to apply for accreditation and to continue through the accreditation
process are voluntary. Applicant institutions for initial accreditation or reaccreditation
may at any time drop out of the accreditation process, subject to their continuing
obligation for the payment of any required fees and already incurred expenses.

2. Scope of Accreditation. DEAC only awards accreditation status for institutions. DEAC
does not offer pre-accreditation or similar status nor does DEAC accredit institutions on a
“partial” basis. Accredited institutions may offer distance education services that are not
part of the institution’s accredited degree or non-degree program curriculum. These could
include, by way of example, continuing education courses, professional development
courses, and courses offered in partnership with individual businesses. However, any
distance education offerings of this nature must be clearly designated as outside of the
scope of accreditation granted by DEAC both on the institution’s website and in the

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 10
 description of the distance education being offered.

3. Procedural Safeguards and Due Process. As referenced in Part One of the Handbook,
peer review lies at the core of the accreditation process for institutions of higher
education in the United States. At the same time, DEAC shares with other accrediting
organizations and educational regulators the recognition that peer review by its nature is
susceptible to subjectivity, potential conflicts of interest, and human error or bias. The
accreditation processes and procedures developed by DEAC have been carefully
designed to safeguard the integrity and quality of institutional and program reviews by
incorporating four primary features: (a) transparency in requirements, standards, and
findings; (b) multiple layers of review by different evaluators; (c) extensive safeguards
against conflicts of interest (further information on the same can be found in Part Four of
the Handbook); and (d) mechanisms for due process afforded throughout the process.

With respect to due process in particular, applicant institutions being evaluated for
accreditation can, for example, (a) respond in writing and with documentation to findings
of DEAC’s subject matter specialists and on-site evaluation team, (b) submit objections
to the selection of on-site evaluation team members, (c) request a new evaluation or
curriculum review, (d) demonstrate why a show cause directive should be lifted, and (e)
appeal a DEAC decision to deny or withdraw accreditation, or deny approval of a
substantive change (as defined in Section XVIII below) to an independent appeals panel
(see Section XII below). Once accredited, member institutions have the opportunity to
review and comment on material substantive changes to DEAC’s accreditation standards
and procedures.

The right of due process does not mean that the DEAC will agree with or accept an
institution’s response or recommendations. In addition, the burden of proof in
demonstrating compliance with the standards rests with the institution at each stage of
DEAC’s evaluation and decision process and through any appellate process exercised by
an institution. However, an institution’s right to respond and be heard at key junctures in
the evaluation process, as well as the institution’s right to appeal the Commission’s
initiation of an adverse actions (defined in Section XI.A below) and denial of substantive
changes, are central to the accreditation process.

4. Meeting or Exceeding Government Standards and Educational Quality Leaders. As

referenced in Part One of this Handbook, the accreditation standards, processes, and
procedures set forth in Parts Two and Three of DEAC’s Accreditation Handbook are in
many instances required or directed by federal regulation or by other recognition or
oversight organizations to which DEAC belongs or voluntarily submits, such as the
Council For Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). When regulations across these
organizations conflict in the extent of their requirements, DEAC adheres to the more
rigorous standards.

In addition, in certain areas, DEAC of its own accord, after review and comment by its
members, has elected to implement disclosure and reporting requirements that exceed
those required by government regulations or those required by other accrediting

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 11
 organizations. This is particularly the case when DEAC believes that higher levels of
transparency benefit the public generally and, more particularly, enrolled and prospective
students of DEAC-accredited institutions/programs.

5. Acceptance of DEAC Bylaws and Published Policies, Procedures and Standards

Institutions that elect to seek accreditation from DEAC or have been accredited by DEAC
must agree in writing to be bound by and comply with the terms of DEAC’s corporate
by-laws and its published policies, standards, and procedures, including those set forth in
the DEAC Accreditation Handbook.

I. ACCREDITATION PROCESS FOR FIRST-TIME APPLICANTS; INITIAL TRAINING

The process for institutions seeking DEAC accreditation for the first time for their institution
occurs in four steps: preparing for accreditation, demonstration of eligibility, self-evaluation
and readiness assessment, and full evaluation for accreditation. Of these, the third and fourth
steps consist of formal evaluations, with the fourth comprising the most rigorous and
comprehensive evaluation of the institution. In the fourth step, a first-time applicant
institution is also entitled to the rights of due process afforded to accredited institutions
seeking reaccreditation. Successful completion of any one step is required before an
institution can proceed to the next step; however, successful completion of a prior step does
not guarantee successful completion of any subsequent step. Applying for accreditation or
reaccreditation is a voluntary process. Accordingly, an institution may at any time during its
pursuit of accreditation decide to withdraw from the process and end its application.

DEAC reserves the right to limit its accreditation process to the kinds of distance education
institutions and types of distance programs that are within its scope of expertise and to
decline to consider institutions and programs for accreditation that are outside DEAC’s scope
or competence or where other circumstances do not permit a meaningful evaluation. The
institution assumes the burden of proof in demonstrating that its curricula, operating
structure, and method of delivery are within DEAC’s recognized scope of authority.

A. Step One: Preparing for Accreditation. A key person at the institution who will be
leading or central to the accreditation application process must enroll in and successfully
complete the Preparing for DEAC Accreditation tutorial to qualify as a compliance
officer. The course is available through the Online Training Center on DEAC’s website at
www.deac.org. This tutorial must be completed within one year prior to submitting the
application for accreditation. DEAC does not accept applications for accreditation
without a copy of the Certificate of Completion for the tutorial from the key person who
completed the course.

B. No Promotional Use of DEAC’s Accreditation Process. An initial applicant institution

may not suggest that it is accredited by or will be accredited by or otherwise carries any
form of approval by DEAC unless and until accreditation has been finally granted, and
then solely in accordance with the rules for referencing DEAC accreditation set forth in
Standard VII.B. Without limiting the foregoing, when an institution applies for initial
accreditation, it must certify on its application for accreditation that it “agrees to not
make any promotional use of its application for accreditation status prior to receiving

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 12
 DEAC accreditation.” If DEAC is informed that an applicant institution has violated the
foregoing prohibition, the DEAC executive director will notify the institution
immediately and tell them to cease and desist. If the institution continues in the
unauthorized disclosure, its application for accreditation will be terminated, and the
institution will not be allowed to reapply for accreditation for one year.

II. ACCREDITATION PROCESS FOR APPLICANTS FOR RENEWAL OF ACCREDITATION

Institutions applying to DEAC for renewal of their accreditation must also complete the
accreditation training tutorial available through the Online Training Center on DEAC’s
website at www.deac.org and submit an application for accreditation and nonrefundable
application fee pursuant to the terms set forth in Section III below. However, they are not
required to undergo a readiness assessment but rather, upon written confirmation from
DEAC that their application has been accepted, proceed directly with a full accreditation
evaluation, including a curriculum review, pursuant to the terms set forth in Section V below.

III. APPLICATION FOR INITIAL ACCREDITATION OR ACCREDITATION RENEWAL; DETERMINING

ELIGIBILITY

After completing the Preparing for DEAC Accreditation online tutorial, an institution
seeking DEAC accreditation or reaccreditation must submit an application for accreditation
and associated nonrefundable fee (see DEAC website for the fee schedule and application
form). The application requires information intended to establish the applicant’s eligibility
(or continued eligibility in the case of institutions applying for reaccreditation) based on the
standards of eligibility set forth below. DEAC makes its determination of eligibility based
primarily on an institution’s application but may also request and review additional
information from the applicant and/or third parties in order to reach its determination. The
burden of proving eligibility is on the applicant institution. Compliance with the eligibility
criteria must be maintained throughout the accreditation evaluation process and any
subsequent term of accreditation.

A determination of an applicant’s eligibility by DEAC is communicated by a letter, delivered

within 30 days of DEAC’s receipt of the application. That letter marks the start of the formal
evaluation of an applicant institution for accreditation. If an initial applicant institution is
determined to be ineligible, DEAC will communicate this decision within the same time
frame and will provide the basis for its decision. Institutions whose applications have not
been accepted may reapply only after they have resolved the disqualifying issue(s) to the
satisfaction of DEAC. If an applicant for reaccreditation is determined to be ineligible, the
Commission will initiate an inquiry into the noncompliance and, when appropriate, will issue
a show cause directive or take other action pursuant to the terms of Section XVII (Interim
Monitoring). Institutions that elect to proceed with their application for accreditation must
complete all steps of the accreditation process within 12 to 18 months after the determination
of eligibility is communicated by DEAC.

The eligibility criteria are as follows:

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 13
A. A distance education institution or provider is defined by DEAC as an educational
institution or organization whose primary purpose is providing education or training that:

1. formally enrolls students and maintains student records;

2. retains qualified faculty to service students;
3. provides educationally sound and up-to-date curricula that are supported by quality
instructional materials and appropriate technology; and
4. provides continuous two-way communication on student work, e.g., evaluating
students’ examinations, projects, and/or answering queries, with timely feedback
given to students.

Furthermore,
5. each program offered by the institution is predominantly distance education or
correspondence education (51 percent or more);
6. the institution offers non-degree and/or degree programs up to the professional
doctoral level pursuant to DEAC’s scope of recognition; and
7. the institution uses the term “college” or “university” in its name only if it offers
academic degree programs.

B. The institution is properly licensed, authorized, exempted, or approved by all applicable

state education institutional authorities (or their equivalent for non-U.S. institutions). The
institution is in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal requirements.
Exemptions from state law must be supported by state-issued documentation or by
express statutory/regulatory language. Proper state authorization in an institution’s state
of domicile is a prerequisite for DEAC accreditation and is required to maintain
accredited status. Accordingly, should an institution lose its state licensure in its state of
domicile for any reason while applying for initial accreditation or reaccreditation, that
process is automatically terminated. In any such situation, the institution shall not be
entitled to receive any refund of fees already paid to DEAC nor shall DEAC have any
liability to the institution associated with the termination of the application/evaluation
process. DEAC accreditation of an accredited institution is also automatically withdrawn
as of the date of the loss of state licensure. Such a withdrawal of accreditation may be
appealed by an institution pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section XII below.

C. At the time of the initial application, the institution has been enrolling students in the
current programs for 12 consecutive months. The institution may not add new programs
during this 12-month period or during the initial accreditation process. In its response to
this criterion, the institution must submit a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet with the names,
mailing addresses, and email addresses of no more than the first 100 students
consecutively enrolled within each division and degree level of the institution, beginning
the first day of the twelfth month preceding the date of this application. If the institution
has less than 100 students, it should submit the information for all students enrolled. Only
institutions that are 100 percent correspondence may submit the names and addresses of
students on self-adhesive mailing labels.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 14
D. At the time of initial application, the institution has been operating under the current legal
status, form of control, and ownership for two consecutive years. The institution may not
undergo changes in current legal status, form of control, or ownership during the initial
accreditation process.

E. The institution has clearly articulated outcomes for its educational offerings and has an
ongoing outcomes assessment program in place designed to measure student achievement
and satisfaction.

F. The institution maintains a permanent physical facility that supports its educational
offerings and business operations in a professional setting. The facility is maintained at a
fixed geographic location that is appropriately licensed or authorized, as required by local
and state regulatory authorities. A Post Office box is not a physical facility address.

G. The institution documents that it is financially sound and can meet its financial
obligations to provide instruction and service to its students by submitting financial
statements in accordance with Part Three, Section XI, Financial Responsibility, DEAC
Accreditation Handbook.

H. The institution demonstrates that its name is free from any association with any activity
that could damage the standing of DEAC or of the accrediting process, such as illegal
actions, unethical conduct, or abuse of consumers.

I. The institution and the institution’s owners, governing board members, officials, and
administrators possess sound reputations and show a record of integrity and ethical
conduct in their professional activities, business operations, and relations. The owners,
governing board members, officials, and administrators have records free from any
association with any malfeasance, including, but not limited to, owning, managing, or
controlling any educational institutions that have entered bankruptcy or have closed, to
the detriment of the students. Ongoing state, federal or local indictments, enforcement
activities, or other censure against an institution, an institution’s owners, governing board
members, officials, and administrators must be promptly disclosed by an institution to
DEAC regardless of whether initiated before or during the period in which an institution
is applying for accreditation or reaccreditation and during any period during which an
institution is accredited by DEAC (Standard X.B). The notice should include an
explanation from the institution as to the circumstances giving rise to the governmental
action and why the governmental action should not result in a declaration of ineligibility
under this section and/or a violation of Standard X. Upon receipt of the notice, the
Commission may, in its sole discretion, initiate investigative proceedings and/or make a
determination that the governmental action places the institution in violation of this
eligibility criterion and of Standard X.

J. The institution agrees that, as part of the application process, its owners, officers, and
managers may be subject to a background check by DEAC, which may include, but not
be limited to, DEAC surveys of state educational oversight agencies, federal departments
and agencies, and consumer protection agencies; and checks on their credit history, prior

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 15
 bankruptcy, criminal background, debarment from federal student aid programs, the
closing of educational institutions in which they were owners, managers or principals, or
the loss of accreditation or state approval to operate an educational institution. The costs
of such background checks will be borne by the applicant.

K. An initial applicant, and its corporate affiliates, must be free from any pending or final
action brought by a state agency or recognized accrediting agency to (1) suspend, revoke,
withdraw, or terminate any one or more of such entities’ legal authority to operate or (2)
deny accreditation or renewal of accreditation to one or more of such entities. An
applicant for reaccreditation and its corporate affiliates must be free from any such final
action by a state agency or recognized accrediting agency.

IV. SELF-EVALUATION AND READINESS ASSESSMENT (FIRST TIME APPLICANTS ONLY)

For initial applicants, the next step after receipt of DEAC’s application acceptance letter is a
readiness assessment conducted by an independent DEAC-appointed evaluator. The
readiness assessment provides a preliminary evaluation of the institution. It is not a
comprehensive examination nor should a finding of “ready” by the evaluator be construed as
an indication that an institution is likely to be granted accreditation if it proceeds with the
more extensive accreditation evaluation. Rather, it is intended to determine whether or not
the institution has sufficient strength and stability to successfully undergo a full evaluation,
and therefore whether a commitment of the institution’s and DEAC’s resources in
administering such an evaluation is merited. The assessment also provides guidance to the
institution on the actions necessary for the institution to prepare for the more in-depth,
rigorous, and comprehensive review. A determination of Not-Ready by an independent
evaluator or the on-site team is final and not subject to appeal or to review by the
Commission.

The first step in the readiness assessment is the submission by the applicant institution of a
completed Self-Evaluation Report (including its exhibits, “SER”), together with the
nonrefundable readiness assessment fee (see DEAC website for the fee schedule) within 60
days of the date when DEAC accepted the institution’s application for accreditation.
Institutions should submit the required materials in accordance with DEAC’s instructions for
electronic submission.

A. Preparation of SER: The SER is prepared by the institution’s compliance officer and
staff in accordance with the terms of the SER form and the DEAC guidance provided in
its Guide to Self-Evaluation. Both the SER and the SER Guide can be downloaded from
DEAC’s website. The SER is an extensive, demanding, and comprehensive report and
provides data on all areas of an institution’s operations and performance, including its
compliance with all DEAC accreditation standards. An institution’s preparation and
submission of an SER is intended both to demonstrate an institution’s compliance with
DEAC’s accreditation standards (see Part Three of the Accreditation Handbook) and to
provide the institution with a useful tool of self-assessment.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 16
 Readiness Evaluation: Following receipt of the applicant’s SER, DEAC’s
independent evaluator reviews the SER and exhibits to determine whether or not the
institution is likely to be able to successfully complete a full accreditation evaluation.
For purposes of achieving a positive result on the readiness assessment, an institution
is not required to demonstrate 100 percent compliance with all accreditation standards
(Part Three, DEAC Accreditation Handbook). However, 100 percent compliance is
required in order to be awarded accreditation. The DEAC evaluator’s feedback on an
applicant’s SER is intended to help the applicant and DEAC assess where the
institution is, in terms of qualifying for accreditation, how much additional work may
be required for the institution to achieve 100 percent compliance, whether the
institution has the capacity to comply with the accreditation standards on an ongoing
basis, and whether or not it is advisable for DEAC and/or the institution to invest their
respective resources in the next, more rigorous stage of evaluation.

B. The Readiness Assessment Report is returned to the institution within 10-12 weeks
following DEAC’s receipt of the institution’s SER. The institution is either “Deemed
Ready” or “Deemed Not Ready”.

Deemed Ready: The institution receives a letter from DEAC indicating that it is
deemed ready to continue the accreditation process. The letter also provides guidance
to the institution on where its operations and SER responses need to be strengthened,
expanded, or revised in order to increase the likelihood of a successful accreditation
evaluation and on-site visit. The letter contains an overview of the accreditation
process, provides information on next steps, and indicates that the DEAC director of
accreditation will coordinate with the institution to schedule the dates for the on-site
evaluation. Institutions that receive a Deemed Ready letter must submit their curricula
for review within three months of receipt of the letter (see Section V below). The
institution must also submit its revised SER to the on-site evaluation team at least five
weeks prior to the scheduled on-site visit.

Deemed Not Ready (Second Submission): The institution receives a letter from
DEAC indicating that it is not deemed ready to continue the accreditation process.
The institution has six months to submit a revised SER incorporating the evaluator’s
comments and recommendations, together with a nonrefundable second submission
readiness fee (see DEAC website for fee schedule). If, based on the revised SER, the
independent DEAC-appointed evaluator deems the institution ready to continue the
accreditation process, the institution will begin the curricular review process required
for the full evaluation by submitting its curricula for review within three months. The
institution must also submit a revised SER to the on-site evaluation team at least five
weeks prior to the scheduled on-site visit.

Deemed Not Ready (Third Submission): If the institution is not deemed ready after
the second submission, the institution has another six months to revise and submit a
new SER incorporating the evaluator’s comments and recommendations. The third
submission is reviewed and evaluated by an independent readiness assessment

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 17
 evaluation team appointed by DEAC, which makes its readiness assessment based on
the revised SER and the results of the virtual readiness assessment visit. A
determination by the team that the institution is not ready is final; however, the
institution can reapply for initial accreditation after one year. The third submission
must be accompanied by the nonrefundable applicable virtual visit fee (see DEAC
website for fee schedule).

V. FULL ACCREDITATION EVALUATION PROCESS

A full accreditation evaluation and review is required of both new applicants for
accreditation and institutions seeking renewal of their accreditation. The process begins in
two parallel paths: (1) the curriculum review and (2) the institution’s preparation and
submission of its SER. It is the responsibility of the institution to initiate both processes.

A. CURRICULAR REVIEW
As a part of the accreditation process, DEAC engages subject matter specialists to
conduct comprehensive evaluations of course/program materials. The subject matter
specialist is responsible for ascertaining whether the curricula and materials offered
by the distance education institution are complete, accurate, and up to date in relation
to stated educational outcomes. While only representative courses are reviewed in
depth, the subsequent on-site review includes the scope and sequence of all curricula.
Course materials submitted as part of an institution’s application for accreditation are
not returned to the institution. The institution is invoiced per subject matter specialist
for each course/program review. Curricular reviews associated with full accreditation
evaluations typically take between three and six months.

Curricular reviews may also occur in the context of a substantive change request (see
Section XVIII for definition). For substantive change applications, the curricular
review may take up to six months. This includes the search for a subject specialist as
well as the review by the subject matter specialist.

B. CURRICULAR REVIEW FOR INSTITUTIONS SEEKING INITIAL ACCREDITATION

1. DEGREE PROGRAMS
a. Once the institution is deemed “ready” to move ahead in the accreditation
process, it submits a list of all programs offered at the institution. DEAC then
selects a sample of courses required for review and sends the institution a
letter indicating the courses required for submission and the fee.

b. For each degree program offered, DEAC selects 50 percent of the courses for
review. The representative courses are selected based on a broad and fair
representation of the curriculum for each degree program.

c. The institution submits an educational offerings report and curriculum

materials for each program, including identified courses with supporting
documentation, for review off site by subject specialists.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 18
 2. NON-DEGREE PROGRAMS
a. Once the institution is deemed “ready” to move ahead in the accreditation
process, it submits a list of all programs offered at the institution. The
institution will receive an invoice for the off-site subject specialist review fee.

b. The institution submits an educational offerings report and the curriculum

materials, including supporting documentation, for review off site by subject
specialists.

3. HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMS

a. Once a high school diploma-awarding institution is deemed “ready” to move
ahead in the accreditation process, it submits a list of the courses offered at the
institution. DEAC reviews the list and selects the courses required for review.
DEAC sends the institution a letter indicating the courses required for
submission. The institution will receive an invoice for the review fee.

b. For each high school program offered, 50 percent of the courses are selected
for review. The representative courses are selected based on the following
criterion:

Broadly and fairly representative of the following subject areas:

mathematics, English, science, social studies, and electives.

c. The institution submits an educational offerings report and the curriculum

materials, including identified courses with supporting documentation, for
review off site by subject specialists.

4. RESPONSE TO THE SUBJECT SPECIALIST REVIEW

All institutions that undergo the curricular review process for initial accreditation
must respond to any “Partially Meets” or “Does Not Meet” findings at least two
weeks prior to the on-site evaluation. The institutional response is sent to DEAC
and is shared with the DEAC on-site evaluation team.

C. CURRICULAR REVIEW FOR INSTITUTIONS SEEKING RENEWAL OF ACCREDITATION

1. DEGREE PROGRAMS
a. An institution undergoing renewal of accreditation submits a list of all degree
programs offered at the institution. DEAC reviews the list and selects the
programs and courses required for review. DEAC sends the institution a letter
indicating the programs and courses required for submission. The institution
will receive an invoice for the off-site subject specialist review fee.

b. The representative programs and courses are selected based on the following
criteria:

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 19
 If one program is offered, DEAC will select approximately 25 percent of
the institution’s courses for review. The selection will include the final or
capstone course.

If between two and 10 programs are offered, the institution will submit 50
percent of the programs, and DEAC will select approximately 25 percent
of the institution’s courses for review. The selection will include the
capstone/final program course.

If more than 11 programs are offered, the institution will submit seven
programs or approximately 25 percent of the programs (whichever is
greater), and DEAC will select approximately 25 percent of the
institution’s courses for review. The selection will include the
capstone/final program course.

c. The institution submits an educational offerings report and curriculum

materials, including identified courses with supporting documentation, for
review by off-site subject specialists.

2. NON-DEGREE PROGRAMS
a. An institution undergoing renewal of accreditation submits a list of all
programs offered at the institution. DEAC reviews the application and sends
the institution a letter indicating the programs required for submission and the
fee.

b. The representative educational offerings are selected based on the following

criterion:

Approximately 25 percent of all educational offerings that are broadly

representative.

c. The institution submits an educational offerings report and the curriculum

materials for each selected educational offering, including supporting
documentation, for review off-site by subject specialists.

3. HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMS

a. An institution undergoing renewal of accreditation submits a list of all high
school programs offered at the institution. DEAC reviews the application and
selects the courses required for review. DEAC sends the institution a letter
indicating the courses required for submission and the fee.

b. For each high school program offered, DEAC will select approximately 25
percent of the courses for review. The representative courses are selected
based on the following criterion:

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 20
 Broadly and fairly representative of the following subject areas:
mathematics, English, science, social studies, and electives.

c. The institution submits an educational offerings report and the curriculum

materials, including identified courses with supporting documentation, for
review off site by subject specialists.

4. RESPONSE TO THE SUBJECT SPECIALIST REVIEW

The institution responds to any “Partially Meets” or “Does Not Meet” findings at
least two weeks prior to the on-site evaluation. The response is sent to DEAC and
shared with the DEAC on-site evaluation team.

D. SELF-EVALUATION REPORT FOR FULL ACCREDITATION EVALUATION

All applicants for accreditation must submit a completed SER as part of the
evaluation process. For institutions applying for accreditation for the first time, the
SER is typically a revision of the SER submitted in connection with the readiness
assessment, expanded and updated based on the applicant’s experience of going
through the assessment and receiving feedback from the DEAC evaluator. The
SER must be submitted to DEAC at least five weeks prior to the scheduled on-site
visit and is shared with the on-site evaluation team. The SER for the full evaluation
follows the same form as the SER required for the readiness assessment (see
Section VI.A. above and DEAC website for the SER form and Guide to Self-
Evaluation). However, institutions submitting SERs in connection with the full
evaluation process must demonstrate that they are in compliance with all DEAC
accreditation standards (see Part Three of DEAC Accreditation Handbook). Partial
compliance is not sufficient to be awarded accreditation.

VI. PETITIONS AND WAIVERS

Whether in connection with an application for accreditation or reaccreditation, or in the
context of a mid-term event, an institution may submit a petition to DEAC requesting a
waiver or alternative interpretation of any DEAC accreditation standard or procedure. Such
submission must be in the format specified by DEAC, document in detail the rationale for the
request, and include documentation the institution wishes to present in support of its request.
Petitions should not be requested simply because an institution does not like a standard or
does not care to be subject to it. Petitions may only be submitted for a significant reason as it
applies to the institution’s mission. Petitions must be submitted at least 45 days in advance of
one of the Commission’s normally scheduled semiannual meetings for consideration at that
meeting or within such alternative time period as DEAC may specify from time to time by
written notice. DEAC may also allow petitions to be filed at other times upon request of an
institution if the Commission determines that such accommodation is appropriate, given the
specific circumstances. 1 All petitions must be accompanied by full payment of the applicable
petition fee (see DEAC website for fee schedule).

1 Refer to Appendix XIII, Part Four, DEAC Accreditation Handbook, for further explanation of such circumstances.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 21
 A. The Commission shall review a properly submitted petition, including its supporting
documentation, and shall vote to either approve or deny the petition.
1. The Commission will grant a waiver or alternative interpretation of its standards or
procedures where an institution is able to demonstrate, as determined by the
Commission in its reasonable discretion, that:

extenuating circumstances are present that indicate that the normal

application of the standard or procedure would create an undue hardship
on the institution or its students, or

the waiver or alternative interpretation meets the underlying purpose and

intent of the standard or procedure.

2. If a petition is denied, the institution may not resubmit a petition for the same request
unless a subsequent change in relevant facts and circumstances or other material
development would be likely to result in a different decision by the Commission.
Petitions are granted for a period of one year for initial applicants and one
accreditation cycle for accredited institutions.

3. DEAC notifies the institution in writing of its decision within 30 days following that
decision. Such notice includes a summary of the rationale for the Commission’s
decision. A decision by the Commission not to grant a waiver or alternative
interpretation is final and is not subject to appeal.

VII. CONSIDERATION OF THIRD-PARTY INFORMATION

A. DEAC publishes notice of the institutions under review for initial or renewal of
accreditation on its website and encourages interested parties to submit written comments
pertaining to such review. DEAC also solicits comments from third parties, such as state
educational agencies, other accrediting or licensing organizations, and other
governmental or quasi-governmental entities. DEAC may also solicit comments from
education-focused media, industry groups, and other relevant parties. Comments may be
submitted via DEAC’s website or by mail or other delivery method.

B. DEAC requests that public and third-party comments are submitted at least 30 days prior
to the scheduled meeting of the Commission at which the institution’s application for
accreditation or reaccreditation is to be evaluated. This timeframe allows for a reasonable
period in which DEAC can share the comment with the institution and the institution can
respond to the same. Comments received after the deadline will be provided to the
Commission, together with such additional information relating to the comment as DEAC
may have gathered. To the extent that the Commission believes that the comment raises
a serious and credible concern with respect to the institution’s compliance with DEAC
accreditation standards which are not addressed by the institution’s SER, the Chair’s
Report, and the institution’s response to the Chair’s Report, the Commission will
determine whether the issuance of a deferral notice or a show cause directive is
appropriate.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 22
 C. Any information received from the public is provided to the institution for review and
response. A copy of the public comment and the institution’s response to the same, if any,
are included in the record to be reviewed by the Commission. Information received from
government agencies or departments is treated in the same way as information obtained
from nongovernmental sources unless the agency or department provides the information
to DEAC with express requirements of confidentiality.

D. With respect to applicants for reaccreditation, the Commission also takes into account
actions by other accrediting organizations that have denied accreditation or renewal of
accreditation status to the institution, have placed the institution on probation, or have
withdrawn/revoked the accreditation or renewal of accreditation status of the institution.
For initial applicants, any of the foregoing may be a barrier to establishing eligibility.

VIII. ON-SITE EVALUATION

On-site evaluations allow the on-site team to independently evaluate the information
submitted in the institution’s Self-Evaluation Report and gather additional facts for DEAC.
All members of the on-site evaluation team are subject to DEAC’s Conflict of Interest Policy
located in the DEAC Accreditation Handbook Appendix.

When appropriate or required by specific circumstances as determined by the Commission in

its discretion, an “on-site” visit may be conducted virtually. The Commission may rely on
virtual on-site visits and treat them as equivalent to actual on-site visits in connection with
any of its decision-making processes. However, where a virtual on-site visit has replaced a
scheduled actual on-site visit, the latter will be rescheduled when practicable.

A. Selection of On-site Team: In selecting evaluators for on-site evaluations in the context
of a full accreditation evaluation, DEAC considers the nature of the institution being
reviewed, the methods of operation unique to the institution, the program(s) offered, and
the expertise and past evaluation experience of the evaluator.

The number of on-site evaluators for a full accreditation evaluation on-site team is
determined by the size of the institution, but the teams generally include:
a Chair,
an education standards evaluator,
a business standards evaluator,
a subject specialist for each subject area,
a DEAC staff member, and
state or federal agency observers (invited).

One person may serve in more than one of the above roles; however, all such roles will
be represented on the on-site team. On-site teams working in other contexts, such as
reviews in connection with substantive changes (see Section XVIII below) are generally
smaller and tailored to the context.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 23
B. Once the evaluators are selected, their names are submitted to the institution. The
institution may object, with an adequate reason, to a specific evaluator and request that
another evaluator be chosen. DEAC considers any objections submitted by an institution
but is not required to replace evaluators to whom objections have been made.

C. On-Site Evaluation Function and Process: The on-site evaluation provides an

opportunity for evaluators to meet with key staff members, faculty/instructors, principal
managers, outside accountants, governing board members, and advisory council members
in order to verify that the institution is meeting its mission, can demonstrate successful
student achievement, and otherwise operates in accordance with DEAC accreditation
standards. All such institutional personnel must be present or readily available by
telephone or other link during the on-site visit.

1. Before the on-site evaluation, each evaluator develops a comprehensive picture of the
institution’s operations by completing a thorough review of the SER and then answers
questions on the evaluation form provided by DEAC.

2. The Chair of the on-site team is responsible for the completion of the on-site
evaluation in accordance with DEAC’s processes and procedures and ensures that
each evaluator completes his/her tasks during the on-site evaluation.

3. A DEAC staff member accompanies the on-site team throughout the on-site
evaluation to ensure objectivity, impartiality, uniformity, consistency in the
interpretation of standards, and adherence to established procedures and to serve as a
liaison between the on-site team and the Commission.

D. Chair’s Report:

The culmination of the on-site visit is the Chair’s Report. This document is created by the
chair of the on-site team and sets forth the team’s findings on the compliance of the
institution with each accreditation standard. The Chair’s Report is provided to DEAC,
which reviews the report for completeness and clarity before forwarding it to the
institution for response, typically within six weeks following the conclusion of the on-site
visit. The institution’s response is due within 30 days following its receipt of the report.
In its response, the institution may add new or supporting information or correct any
incorrect statements made in the Chair’s Report. Both the Chair’s Report and the
institution’s response are submitted to the Commission, together with other evaluation
materials, including the SER, subject matter specialist reports, and third-party comments
(if any) and the institution’s response to the same (if any). The Commission will review
all documents prior to making a decision on the institution’s application. In the event that,
following the on-site visit but prior to the Commission’s making its decision on the
accreditation of an applicant institution, the institution undergoes a material change in its
management, method of operation, enrollment, or program offerings, or has any reason to
believe it is no longer in compliance with one or more of the accreditation standards, the
institution must promptly notify DEAC in writing and include such details as are
available so that the Commission can consider the same in the review of the institution’s

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 24
 application.

IX. COMMISSION ACTIONS ON INITIAL AND RENEWAL OF ACCREDITATION

The Commission usually meets twice a year, in January and June, to review the evaluation
file for applicants for initial accreditation or renewal of accreditation. The evaluation file
typically consists of the applicant’s application for accreditation, the Self-Evaluation Report
submitted for the full evaluation, the Chair’s Report, the institution’s response to the Chair’s
Report, subject specialists’ reports and the institution’s response to the same, student surveys,
any complaints filed against the institution by any person or entity, any responses to public
notices and requests for comments to governmental and other industry entities, any
institutional response to the foregoing, substantive communications between the institution
and the DEAC relating to the accreditation process, and other relevant documentation that
may be submitted or created by the institution, DEAC or the public in connection with the
evaluation process.

Prior to the Commission meeting at which applications for accreditation or reaccreditation

are to be evaluated, each member of the Commission is required to complete and sign a
Conflict of Interest form with respect to each institution to be considered at that meeting and
to recuse themselves from the evaluation and decision making with respect to any institution
with whom a conflict exists (see Part Four of the Handbook for DEAC’s Conflict of Interest
Policy and associated forms).

Notice of the Commission’s decision with respect to each applicant for accreditation or
reaccreditation is provided to the institution within thirty (30) days following the decision,
Notice is also provided, as applicable and pursuant to the terms of Section XV, to the
Secretary of Education, applicable state licensing/regulatory agencies, other
accrediting/licensing organizations, and the public.

The Commission takes one of four courses of action when evaluating a candidate for
accreditation or reaccreditation. It may:

A. Accredit a new applicant institution for up to three years or renew an institution’s

accredited status for up to five years. In either case, the Commission may, in its
discretion, also require that the institution submit interim reports on specific programs or
services at different points during the institution’s accreditation term. These reports are
separate and apart from the interim annual reporting requirements of all DEAC-
accredited institutions.

1. If an institution complies in all material respects with DEAC’s accreditation standards

but the Commission has identified minor administrative or clerical deficiencies in the
institution’s documentation or operations that can be easily corrected by the
institution and those corrections can be confirmed remotely by DEAC staff, then the
Commission may vote to grant accreditation or the renewal of accreditation to such
institution contingent on written confirmation of the correction(s) by DEAC’s
executive director. In such event, the staff will notify the institution of the
deficiencies to be corrected and the deadline for making the corrections. If a

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 25
 deficiency continues beyond the stated deadline, the accreditation decision with
respect to such institution will be deferred until the Commission’s next scheduled
semiannual meeting.

B. Defer a decision pending the Commission’s receipt of additional information requested

in the deferral notice. A deferral notice is issued in order for the institution to provide
additional information and/or supplement its response with respect to concerns of the
Commission, in each case as set forth in the deferral notice. A deferral notice does not
represent a determination of non-compliance. The maximum deferral period is 12
months from the date of the Commission’s decision unless the Commission extends the
period for “good cause” as defined below. In no event will the deferral period, including
any good cause extensions, extend beyond the shorter of 24 months or 150 percent of the
length of the institution’s longest program.

1. Deferral Notice: Within 30 days following a Commission decision to defer a decision

on an institution’s application for accreditation or reaccreditation, DEAC will send
the institution written notice of such decision (the “deferral notice”). The deferral
notice will:

a. identify the accreditation standards for which the Commission requires additional
information, reports, on-site evaluations, and/or performance data in order to fully
evaluate the institution’s compliance;

b. provide the time frames within which such additional requirements must be
completed and a description of the additional information and materials to be
provided; and

c. inform the institution of the month in which its application for accreditation or
renewal of accreditation will next be reviewed by the Commission.

The deferral notice may also require that the institution refrain from making or
proposing any substantive changes (as defined in Section XVIII below) during the
deferral period. However, if a substantive change is required to more effectively
address a concern or question expressed in the deferral notice, the institution may
request approval of such change. Any such request must provide a detailed rationale
to demonstrate why the requested change would most effectively respond to the
identified issue.

2. Decision Following Deferral: Upon review of an institution that has previously

received a deferral notice, the Commission may:

a. grant accreditation or renewal of accreditation if it determines that the

institution’s response demonstrates that the institution is compliant with the cited
accreditation standards and requirements;

b. extend the deferral period if appropriate;

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 26
 c. issue a show cause directive in accordance with the procedures set forth below; or

d. deny accreditation or reaccreditation as set forth below.

3. Status During Deferral Period. An accredited institution under a deferral notice will
retain its accreditation status unless and until the Commission decides to deny or
withdraw its accreditation, as applicable. However, notice of the deferral will be
published on DEAC’s website.

C. In cases where the Commission does not believe that an institution has demonstrated
compliance with accreditation standards and other requirements, the Commission will
direct the institution to Show Cause as to why its application for accreditation or
reaccreditation should not be denied.

Show Cause Directive: Within 30 days following the Commission decision, DEAC will
issue a notice to the institution requiring it to show cause why its application for
accreditation or reaccreditation should not be denied (the “show cause directive”). The
show cause directive will:

identify the accreditation standard(s) with which the institution has not demonstrated
compliance;
set forth the reasons why the Commission believes that the institution is not in
compliance with DEAC accreditation standards;
advise the institution of its obligations, reporting requirements, and/or required
remedial action under the show cause directive and the time frames established for
the same (the entire period of remediation, the “Show Cause Remediation Period”);
and
require that the institution refrain from making or proposing any substantive changes
(as defined in Section XVIII below) during the Show Cause Remediation Period
unless the proposed change is reasonably required to demonstrate the institution’s
compliance with DEAC accreditation standards. Any request for approval of such a
substantive change must provide a detailed rationale to demonstrate why the
requested change would most effectively respond to one or more issues identified in
the show cause directive.

In certain situations, where a large number of accreditation standards may be implicated

by the Commission’s identified concerns or where the Commission identifies systemic
problems, the show cause directive may require the institution to submit to a
comprehensive re-evaluation. This may include a requirement that the institution submit
an updated application for accreditation in order to update and confirm eligibility status
and an updated SER, as well as a new curricular review and on-site visit.

Show Cause Remediation Period. The maximum Show Cause Remediation Period may
not exceed the shorter of (a) two years, or (b) 150 percent of the length of the institution’s

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 27
 longest program (unless the Commission extends the period for “good cause” as defined
below). The burden of proof rests with the institution to demonstrate, within the Show
Cause Remediation Period (as that may be extended for good cause shown) and
consistent with the terms of the show cause directive, that it is meeting DEAC’s
accreditation standards. In no event will a Show Cause Remediation Period, including
any good faith extensions which may be granted, exceed three years.

Decision Following Show Cause Remediation Period: Upon review of the application
for accreditation or reaccreditation of an institution that has previously received a show
cause directive, a decision is made on the institution’s compliance with the accreditation
standards or requirements noted in the directive. The Commission may:

vacate the show cause directive and either defer an accreditation decision or grant
accreditation or reaccreditation if it is determined that the grant is warranted;
continue the show cause directive and require the submission of additional
information or further reports from the institution and/or a special visit in accordance
with Section X.A. below; or
deny accreditation or reaccreditation.

Status During Pendency of Show Cause Directive. An institution under a show cause
directive will retain its accreditation status unless and until the Commission decides to
deny or withdraw its accreditation, as applicable. However, notice of the show cause
directive will be published on DEAC’s website and must be included by the institution in
its description of its accreditation status, in accordance with the terms of Section XV.E.

D. Deny accreditation to an applicant provided, however, that:

1. Prior to moving to deny accreditation to an institution where the denial would be based
solely upon the institution’s failure to meet DEAC Standard XI: Financial
Responsibility, the Commission will notify the institution of the identified deficiencies
and afford the institution a one-time opportunity to provide the Commission with
financial information that (a) would bear materially on the Commission’s evaluation of
the identified deficiencies and (b) was not available to the institution prior to the
Commission’s scheduled meeting to evaluate the institution’s application. If the
Commission determines, in its sole and exclusive judgment, that the new information
does not satisfy the foregoing criteria, the Commission will notify the institution that it
is initiating an adverse action to deny the institution for accreditation or
reaccreditation. If the Commission determines that the new information does satisfy
the listed criteria, the Commission will consider the new information prior to making a
decision on the institution’s application for accreditation or reaccreditation. Although a
decision by the Commission to deny accreditation to an institution is an appealable
decision, the determination by the Commission that the new information is insufficient
to justify a re-evaluation of the institution’s compliance with Accreditation Standard
XI is not.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 28
 2. If the Commission initiates an adverse action to deny an institution’s application for
renewal of its accreditation, the institution will retain its accredited status unless and
until the earlier of (a) the period to appeal the decision lapses without the institution
filing a notice of appeal or (b) the Commission’s decision is upheld in its original
form or as amended by the appeals panel. However, notice of the Commission’s
decision to deny a renewal of accreditation and the status of any appeal will be
published on DEAC’s website and must be included by the institution in its
description of its accreditation status, in each case in accordance with the terms of
Section XV.C. Institutions appealing a denial of accreditation must refrain from
making or proposing any substantive changes. If the Commission initiates adverse
action to deny an initial institution’s application for accreditation, the institution may
also elect to appeal such decision or may choose to reapply after one year.

E. Good Cause: The Commission may, in its sole discretion and upon written request of an
institution providing detailed grounds for its request, agree to extend the Deferral Period
or Show Cause Remediation Period, as applicable, for good cause shown. An institution
requesting an extension must provide evidence, in its request, that it has made substantial,
good faith progress toward compliance with the requirements of the deferral notice or
show cause directive and that granting the extension will not impose an unreasonable
burden on or otherwise cause harm to students. A “good cause” extension may be
allowed, for example, when an institution needs additional time to more fully document
the scope and permanence of its compliance with DEAC accreditation standards or to
establish an extended history of such compliance. A decision to grant a “good cause”
extension may be made contingent on the institution’s submission of interim reports on
progress and related data. If the result of a “good cause” extension results in a Show
Cause Remediation Period longer than that authorized by federal regulation, the
Commission notifies the U.S. Secretary of Education of its decision and the reason for the
same. A decision by the Commission not to grant a “good cause” extension is not
appealable.

X. ACTIONS AVAILABLE TO COMMISSION DURING AN ACCREDITATION TERM

The Commission may take any of the following actions (defined in Section XI below) with
respect to an accredited institution during its accreditation term:

A. Direct the institution to undergo a special visit. The Commission may require a special
visit due to unusual circumstances or failure by the institution to meet its obligations to
DEAC. The Commission’s requirement for a special visit may be triggered by:

a serious or an unusually large number of student or other complaints e.g., “whistle-

blower” complaints;
state or federal investigations or legal action taken against an institution;
an institution’s failure to continue to comply with a condition of accreditation;
reported negative financial conditions or events;
a show cause directive issued by the Commission;

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 29
 governmental complaints against the institution; or
similar serious concerns.

The procedure for special visits is as follows:

1. the institution is directed to submit a self-evaluation report with respect to the specific
area(s) of concern;
2. the on-site visit is scheduled for 1-2 days depending upon the scope of the issue
(which is determined by the concerns giving rise to the special visit;
3. the on-site team includes evaluators selected for their expertise in the area(s) of
concern;
4. during the on-site visit, the on-site team reviews documents and interviews relevant
institution personnel and/or students;
5. the on-site team’s review culminates in a Chair’s Report summarizing the team’s
findings;
6. the institution is invited to respond to the Chair’s Report; and
7. a record is provided to the Commission consisting of the materials giving rise to the
on-site visit, the institution’s self-evaluation report, the Chair’s Report, and the
institution’s response to the same.

Commission-ordered special visits are conducted in a timely fashion. In no case will the
time frame for conducting and reporting the on-site evaluation extend beyond 12 months
from the date the Commission is first made aware of any condition requiring a special
visit.

If an institution refuses to agree to undergo a special visit, pay the fees for the visit in a
timely manner, or observe the timelines specified by the Commission, it will be reported
to the Commission for action, including withdrawing accreditation.

B. Mid-Term Show Cause Directive. A show cause directive may be issued by the
Commission to an accredited institution which the Commission has reason to believe is
no longer in compliance with DEAC accreditation standards during an accreditation term.
In such event, the institution is directed to show cause why its accreditation should not be
withdrawn. The mid-term issuance of a show cause directive shall follow the same terms
as are set forth in Section IX.C. above. However, the decision by the Commission at the
end of the Show Cause Remediation Period is whether or not to withdraw the institution’s
accreditation, extend the Show Cause Remediation Period for good cause, or vacate the
show cause directive if warranted by the remedial actions implemented by the institution.

C. If a DEAC member institution is the subject of an adverse action or negative change in

accreditation status by another recognized accrediting agency or has been placed on
probation or an equivalent status by another recognized accrediting agency, the
Commission shall promptly review the institution’s compliance with the relevant DEAC
accreditation standards to determine if DEAC should also initiate an adverse action, issue
a show cause directive or initiate such further investigation of the institution as it deems
proper.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 30
 D. The Commission may take immediate adverse action, without prior notice or issuance of
a show cause directive, to initiate an action to withdraw accreditation from an institution
or program if it determines, in its reasonable discretion, that an institution’s violations of
DEAC standards and/or policies warrant such immediate action. A decision to initiate an
adverse action under the terms of this paragraph is subject to the due process rights set
forth in Section XII below.

XI. DEFINITIONS RELATING TO COMMISSION ACTIONS

A. Definition of Adverse Action. Two actions available to be taken by the Commission are
considered “adverse actions” and therefore subject to appeal by an institution. These are:

1. the Commission’s denial of an institution’s application for accreditation or

reaccreditation; and
2. the Commission’s withdrawal of the existing accreditation of an institution for cause.

The Commission initiates an adverse action when it votes to deny accreditation or

reaccreditation to an institution or to withdraw an institution’s existing accreditation.
The Commission’s decision is subject to appeal and the adverse action only becomes
final after the appeal process has been exhausted or after the right of appeal has been
waived by the applicant institution. Until such time as the adverse action becomes
final, an accredited institution is responsible for remaining in full compliance with
DEAC accreditation standards and is subject to ongoing DEAC monitoring and
directives, as applicable.

Adverse actions are disclosed to the institution, applicable state and federal regulatory
agencies, other accrediting organizations as appropriate, and the public when they are
initiated and when they become final pursuant to the terms of Section XV.

B. Definition of Final Decision. A decision by the Commission to grant accreditation or

reaccreditation to an institution is final as of the date on which the Commission votes for
such a grant. A decision by the Commission to take adverse action is initiated by a vote
of the Commission but does not become final until such time as the institution’s right of
appeal is exhausted or waived. Decisions taken by the Commission during an
institution’s term of accreditation that do not initiate adverse action (such as decisions to
order a special visit or issue a show cause directive) are final when taken but are not
subject to appeal except for decisions to deny a substantive change. An institution may
only appeal (1) decisions not to approve a substantive change and (2) decisions by the
Commission to initiate an adverse action.

C. Record. The term “Record” refers to the body of materials submitted to the Commission
and on which the Commission bases its review and decisions. In the context of
applications for accreditation or reaccreditation, the Record typically consists of the
eligibility application, the SER, the academic specialists reports and the institution’s
response to the same, the Chair’s Report and the institution’s response to the same, third
party comments received by DEAC, and when relevant, annual reports, other interim

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 31
 reports from the institution, and media reports. In the case of mid-accreditation reviews,
the scope of the Record will be determined by the nature of the matter(s) giving rise to
the review. In any decision-making process, the Commission may also consider (1)
applicable state and federal regulations and guidelines; (2) applicable licensing
requirements; (3) relevant rules, guidelines, and requirements of other accrediting
organizations and educational standards organizations; (4) enforcement, disciplinary,
investigative or other actions taken by state or federal entities, or accrediting
organizations, with respect to the institution, and (5) DEAC’s accreditation standards and
published policies, procedures, forms, and website content.

XII. APPEALING A COMMISSION’S ADVERSE DECISION

Only decisions by the Commission to initiate adverse action or not to approve a substantive
change can be appealed by an institution. The appeal is limited to a claim of material error in
the decision attributable to (a) a failure of the Record to support the decision or (b) a material
misapplication of DEAC’s accreditation standards or published procedures or policies which
materially affected the outcome of the Commission’s decision-making process. The fact that
the Record considered by the Commission could have also supported a different decision is
not sufficient grounds for the appeals panel to remand the matter if the Commission’s actual
decision is also supported by the Record. The institution is entitled to be represented by
counsel in connection with any or all portions of its appeal.

An institution must first appeal an appealable Commission decision to an independent

appeals panel as set forth in this Section before challenging that decision in any other forum.

A. Nature of Appeals Process. DEAC is committed to fairly evaluating each institution

before voting to deny or withdraw accreditation or before denying a proposal for
substantive change. Accordingly, DEAC does not consider or approach a review of an
appealable decision by the appeals panel to be an adversarial procedure. Rather, the goal
of the appeals process is to ensure that decisions to initiate adverse actions and denials of
substantive changes were properly considered and were supported by the Record.
DEAC’s participation in the review process is therefore limited primarily to ensuring that
information provided to the appeals panel is accurate, not misleading, and is supported by
the Record.

B. Appeal Process
1. Application for Appeal. An institution appealing an appealable decision by the
Commission must submit the Application for Appeal form (available from DEAC’s
website) together with the applicable appeals fee (see fees page on DEAC website) to
the executive director of DEAC within 10 days of the receipt of DEAC’s letter
advising the institution of the decision that is being appealed. The application for
appeal shall state generally the basis on which the appeal is being made. An
institution’s failure to submit the application for appeal and associated fee within the
10-day period will waive its right of appeal, and the Commission’s decision will
automatically become final and take full force and effect.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 32
 2. Statement of Appeal. An institution which has timely filed an application for appeal
must then submit a written statement setting forth all of the reasons the institution
believes that the Commission’s decision was in clear error and the part or parts of the
Record that support its positions. The institution may provide alternative bases for a
determination of error, but evidence in support of each basis is limited to the
materials and information included in the Record; no evidence or information not
included in the Record will be considered by the appeals panel. The institution’s
statement must be delivered to the DEAC executive director within thirty (30) days of
the institution’s receiving notification of the decision being appealed.

3. Burden of Proof. The institution has the burden to show that the Commission’s
decision resulted from errors or omissions in the execution of DEAC’s policies and
procedures or that the decision was not based on substantial evidence in the Record.
One or more specific procedural errors or unsupported findings by the Commission
will not result in a remand if the balance of the Record independently supports the
decision taken by the Commission. No new materials may be presented for the
appeals panel’s consideration on appeal.

4. DEAC Response. DEAC may, in its discretion, submit a written response to the
appellant’s statement within 30 days following its receipt of the appellant institution’s
statement.

5. Request for Oral Argument. In its written statement, the appellant institution must
state whether or not it wants the appeals panel to hear oral argument. The names and
affiliations of those appearing to make the oral presentation should be included with
the request when available; if not available at the time of the request, and in the
absence of extenuating circumstances justifying a later disclosure, the institution shall
provide the same no later than seven days prior to the scheduled hearing date. If the
appellant institution does not request oral argument, then the appeals panel will make
its decision based on the Record, the Commission’s written findings and reasons
related to the decision being appealed, the appellant’s statement, and DEAC’s
response to that statement (if any) (the “Record for Appeal”).

6. Materials Provided to the Appeals Panel. DEAC is responsible for providing to the
appeals panel, within 45 days following the appellant institution’s submission of its
statement, a copy of the Record for Appeal. A copy of DEAC’s response will be
provided to the institution on the same date.

C. Hearing Procedure
1. A hearing before the appeals panel shall be scheduled within 60 days following the
delivery of the Record for Appeal to appeals panel members. The hearing will be
held virtually unless the appeals panel determines, in its sole discretion, that the
physical presence of the panel and the parties is reasonably required. The appellant
institution shall have 30 minutes in which to argue its case in front of the appeals
panel. The 30 minutes does not include the time attributable to questions from the
appeals panel and the institution’s response to the same. The time period may also be

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 33
 extended by the appeals panel in its discretion. Oral argument by the institution may
not include arguments not previously made in its statement. DEAC shall have at least
one representative present at the hearing. The DEAC representative shall participate
in the proceeding solely for the purpose of correcting errors or misleading statements
made in the process. The institution shall have the opportunity to respond to any such
correction by indicating the part(s) of the Record supporting the perceived error or
misleading statement. Depending on the nature of the hearing (e.g., whether virtual or
not), DEAC will indicate to the appeals panel its interest in speaking and the appeals
panel will afford it an opportunity to do so in its discretion. Any DEAC correction
and institutional response shall not be included within the 30-minute time limitation.

2. The appeal hearing will be recorded by stenographic or electronic means, and a copy
of the same will be provided to the institution upon request.

3. The appeals panel will render its decision within 30 days following the hearing date,
if a hearing is held, or within 30 days following the submission of the Record for
Appeal if no hearing is requested. The decision shall provide a summary of the
appeals panel rationale for its decision. The decision will be delivered to the DEAC
executive director, who shall provide it to the Commission and the institution within
one business day.

D. Appeals Panel
1. The institution’s appeal is heard by an independent appeals panel that does not
include DEAC staff or members of the Commission and serves as an additional level
of due process for the institution. It can affirm, amend, or remand the prior decision
of the Commission as set forth below.

2. The appeals panel does not have authority to evaluate or rule on the reasonableness of
eligibility criteria, procedures, or accreditation standards. Its role is to determine
whether the Commission’s action was clearly erroneous in that it was not supported
by any reasonable evaluation of the Record and/or attributable to a material error in
applying DEAC’s accreditation standards and procedures.

3. The appeals panel consists of three people appointed by DEAC: a public member, an
academic, and an administrator. Potential members of an appeals panel are selected
by DEAC’s executive director from the ranks of former members of the Commission,
the corps of DEAC evaluators, and active staff of DEAC-accredited institutions who
have completed DEAC’s evaluator training program. In order to ensure a prompt
hearing of appeals, DEAC maintains a pool of potential appeals panel candidates who
have agreed to serve if requested. These candidates receive annual training on
DEAC’s accreditation standards, evaluation processes and procedures, conflict of
interest policy, and the appeals panel process, scope, and responsibility.

4. Candidates selected for the appeals panel must possess knowledge of DEAC’s
accreditation mission, standards, and procedures. The candidates cannot include any
current member of the Commission or any person involved in an evaluation of the

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 34
 appellant institution completed within the previous five years and cannot have a
conflict of interest as defined in DEAC’s Conflict of Interest Policy (see Part Four of
DEAC Accreditation Handbook). The executive director submits a list of proposed
appeals panel members to the appellant institution. Within 10 calendar days of
receiving the list of proposed panel members, the appellant institution may request, in
writing, that any person or persons be removed from the list on the basis of potential
conflict of interest as defined in DEAC’s Conflict of Interest Policy. If DEAC
determines that the request is reasonable, the candidate will be replaced.

E. Decisions Available to the Appeals Panel

1. Affirm: If the appeals panel determines that the institution has failed to meet its
burden of proof in showing that the Commission’s action was not supported by
the record or was attributable to a material error in its application of DEAC’s
published policies and procedures, it must affirm the decision of the Commission.

2. Remand: The appeals panel may remand a decision to the Commission for
reconsideration when it finds that the Record on Appeal (and, as applicable, the
hearing transcript) did not support the Commission’s decision. In its decision to
remand, the appeals panel must identify those material facts that it finds the
Commission failed to consider or where the Commission otherwise committed
one or more material errors in its deliberations and decision-making process. The
Commission must act in a manner consistent with the appeals panel’s decisions
and/or instructions.

3. Affirm and Amend: If the appeals panel determines that, although it agrees with
the Commission’s decision based on the entirety of the Record for Appeal, one or
more elements of the Commission’s stated reasoning or procedural actions was
nevertheless clearly in error, the appeals panel may amend the decision. An
appeals panel decision to amend a Commission decision remands the matter to the
Commission in order that the Commission modify the bases for its decision in
accordance with the specific direction of the appeals panel.

4. Communication of Decision: The appeals panel will communicate its decision to

DEAC in a written report setting forth the basis for its decision. DEAC will then
notify the institution of the decision in writing.

F. DEAC Receipt and Implementation of Appeals Panel Decisions

If the Commission’s decision to initiate an adverse action or to deny a request for
substantive change is upheld by the appeals panel in its original or in an amended
form,

1. the Commission’s decision takes effect pursuant to the terms of Section XII.D.;
2. DEAC will so notify the institution and provide the institution with a period of 60
days in which to file a written comment to the decision as provided under Section
XV.G; and
3. the institution is not eligible to reapply for accreditation or for the applicable

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 35
 substantive change for a period of one year from the date of the appeals panel
decision.

If the appeals panel remands the matter to the Commission for further evaluation and
decision making pursuant to the appeals panel’s instructions, the Commission will
undertake such re-evaluation and decision making at its next regularly scheduled
meeting or at an earlier scheduled meeting, in its discretion. If, on remand, the
Commission again votes against the accreditation or reaccreditation of an institution
or in favor of the withdrawal of accreditation from an institution, or if it again votes
to deny approval for a substantive change, the institution is entitled to a right of
appeal with respect to that decision.

G. Confidentiality of Proceedings. The Record for Appeal, the transcript of the hearing
(if applicable), and the appeals panel report to DEAC (collectively, the Appellate
Record) shall be treated as DEAC proprietary information and shall not be disclosed
to any third party except as required in connection with any arbitration proceedings
initiated by an institution.

XIII. BINDING ARBITRATION

If an institution elects to dispute the Commission’s initiation of an adverse action or a
Commission decision not to approve a substantive change beyond the appeals process
administered by DEAC, its dispute shall be resolved exclusively through binding arbitration.
To initiate such arbitration, the institution must submit to DEAC a request for a de novo
review by an independent arbitrator within five business days of its receipt of written notice
from the Commission of its decision (after the appeal has been exhausted) together with the
applicable non-refundable arbitration fee (see DEAC website for arbitration fee). Such
arbitration shall be conducted under the auspices of the American Arbitration Association
(AAA) and must be initiated by the institution with the AAA within 30 days following the
institution’s receipt of notice that the adverse action taken by the Commission has become
final. The sole and exclusive venue for the arbitration shall be the District of Columbia.

Arbitration under this section shall be conducted by a single arbitrator who must have
familiarity and experience with the field of higher education and the federal rules governing
accrediting organizations. The AAA will provide a list of qualified arbitrator candidates. The
institution and DEAC will use good faith efforts to select an arbitrator from the AAA list; if
they are unable to do so, the AAA will select the arbitrator. The question(s) to be resolved by
the arbitrator are limited to whether the Commission’s decision was clearly erroneous
because it was (a) not reasonably supported by the Record for Appeal and/or (b) solely
attributable to a misapplication of DEAC’s accreditation standards or published policies and
procedures. The fact that the Record considered by the Commission could have also
supported a different decision is not sufficient grounds for an arbitrator to reverse the
decision if the Commission’s actual decision is also supported by the Record.

The arbitration shall be held within ninety days following the submission of the Record of
Appeal to the Appeals Panel. The date for the hearing shall be determined by the arbitrator in
their discretion but may be revised by the arbitrator in their discretion in response to a request

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 36
 for change from either party. The institution may submit a brief of no longer than 20 pages at
least 30 days prior to the hearing date. DEAC may respond to the institution’s brief with a
brief of no more than 20 pages. No discovery shall be authorized nor may evidence in
addition to that in the Record for Appeal be introduced in either party’s briefs or oral
argument. At the arbitration hearing, each party shall be entitled to 20 minutes of oral
argument, including questions from the arbitrator. A party may reserve up to five minutes for
use in a closing statement. A transcript of the hearing shall be made and provided in
electronic form to the arbitrator and each of the parties. The arbitrator shall make a decision
based on the Record for Appeal, the briefs of the parties, and the arbitration hearing (the
“Arbitral Record”).

The arbitrator may affirm, affirm in an amended form, or remand the Commission decision at
issue. The decision of the arbitrator shall include a summary of the reasoning supporting the
decision and shall be delivered to the institution and DEAC within 60 days following the
arbitration hearing. The decision of the arbitrator is binding on the parties and may be
reviewed by the federal courts only for abuse of discretion. It is enforceable by all courts of
competent jurisdiction. The arbitration proceedings, arbitration filings and Record for
Appeal shall be treated as confidential by the parties except as may be required to enforce
their respective rights. The arbitrator’s decision shall not be deemed confidential.

The expense of the AAA, the arbitrator, and the hearing transcription shall be shared equally
by the parties. Otherwise, each party shall bear its own costs in connection with the
arbitration.

XIV. RECORD KEEPING AND CONFIDENTIALITY

A. Records Maintained. DEAC maintains in electronic form complete and accurate

records of:

1. its last full accreditation reviews of each institution, including the application, on-site
evaluation team reports, the institution’s responses to on-site reports, periodic review
reports, any reports of special reviews conducted between regular reviews, and a copy of
the institution’s most recent Self-Evaluation Report;

2. all decisions made throughout each institution’s affiliation with DEAC regarding its
accreditation and any substantive change, including all correspondence that is
significantly related to those decisions;

3. all materials associated with any appeal or arbitration that may be initiated by an
institution; and

4. minutes of all Board of Directors and Commission meetings.

B. Confidentiality of Records:

1. Institution’s Obligations with Respect to Information Related to a Commission

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 37
 Action or Proceeding. Reports, evaluations (including curriculum evaluations),
internal rubrics, analyses, third-party comments (whether or not solicited and
including communications from federal and/or state entities or other accrediting or
licensing organizations), financial data and analyses, investigative findings,
professional advice, and other materials related to or created in connection with
DEAC business or accrediting operations (individually and collectively, and in each
case to the extent not made publicly available by the Commission, “DEAC
proprietary information”) should be treated as confidential to DEAC and may not be
disclosed by an institution to any third party, directly or indirectly without the prior
written authorization of DEAC, except

a. as required in connection with federal or state regulatory proceedings or

pursuant to judicial process;

b. in the context of any appeals panel or arbitration proceeding pursued by an

institution, provided that such disclosures shall be made under provisions of
confidentiality equivalent to or more stringent than those set forth in this
paragraph;

c. to the extent consisting solely of third-party materials, if such materials have also
been made available to the public by such third parties; and

d. to the extent reasonably required by an institution’s governing body and

professional advisors, provided that any such persons or entities to whom
information is disclosed are bound by written agreement or professional code of
ethics not to further disclose the information.

The foregoing restrictions on disclosure do not apply to DEAC proprietary

information, which DEAC makes generally available to the public on its website or
through other public disclosures. However, DEAC’s disclosure of DEAC proprietary
information to any other accrediting agency, to a state or federal governmental entity
or regulatory body or in the context of appeals panel or arbitration processes, does not
impair or modify the restrictions on disclosure set forth above. Nothing in the
foregoing shall be construed as converting institution information and data into
DEAC proprietary information when not incorporated in materials, reports, analyses,
or similar submissions or communications with DEAC.

2. DEAC’s Obligations with Respect to Information Provided by Institutions. DEAC

does not disclose information provided by an institution in connection with DEAC
accreditation evaluations or other matters specific to that institution except

a. to the extent that such information is made generally available to the public by the
institution or another third party;

b. as provided under DEAC’s then-current policies and procedures including,

without limitation, those set forth in the DEAC Accreditation Handbook;

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 38
 c. when requested, required, or directed by a state or federal government entity or
regulation, law enforcement entity, judicial or administrative process, or a state,
federal, or industry accrediting or licensing body;

d. in connection with legal requirements or proceedings, whether or not DEAC is a

direct party to such proceedings; and

e. in situations where, in DEAC’s reasonable discretion, the Commission determines

that disclosure is appropriate to maintain the integrity of the accreditation process
and/or agency.

In addition, information relating to non-U.S. locations or institutions may also be

shared with and at the request or direction of applicable foreign authorities, licensing
bodies, legal requirements, and judicial or administrative proceedings.

XV. NOTIFICATION AND INFORMATION SHARING BY DEAC

A. Initial and Renewal of Accreditation: DEAC provides written notice to the U.S.
Secretary of Education, the appropriate state licensing or authorizing agencies, the
appropriate accrediting organizations, and the public (through DEAC’s website) at the
same time it notifies the institution of the decision, but no later than 30 days after the
Commission makes its decision to grant accreditation or accreditation renewal.

B. Action Notwithstanding Third-Party Action: If DEAC grants initial accreditation or

renewal of accreditation to an institution notwithstanding the threatened interim or final
adverse or negative actions taken against the institution by another recognized
accrediting agency or state agency, DEAC will provide the Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Education, within 30 days of its action, a thorough explanation of why
the previous action by the accrediting agency or state does not preclude DEAC’s action.

C. Denial or Withdrawal of Accreditation: DEAC provides written notice to the U.S.

Secretary of Education, the appropriate state licensing or authorizing agencies, the
appropriate accrediting organizations and the public (through DEAC’s website) at the
same time it notifies the institution of the decision, but no later than 30 days after the
Commission initiates an action to deny or withdraw accreditation to an institution.
DEAC requires the institution to disclose the initiation of an adverse action to all current
and prospective students within seven business days of receipt of the written notice of
the Commission’s decision. Such notice must, at minimum, meet the requirements of
Section XVI.A.3. below.

If the initiated adverse action becomes final following the exhaustion or waiver of the
institution’s right of appeal, DEAC will again provide written notice to the U.S.
Secretary of Education, the appropriate state licensing or authorizing agencies, the
appropriate accrediting organizations and the public (through DEAC’s website) at the
same time it notifies the institution of the decision, but no later than 30 days after the

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 39
 adverse action becomes final. DEAC also requires the institution to disclose that the
adverse action had become final and that the institution is no longer accredited by
DEAC to all current and prospective students within seven business days of receipt of
the written notice of the final adverse decision and consistent with the requirements of
Section XVI.A.3 below.

D. Notice of Deferral. DEAC publishes a notice of deferral on its website within 30 days
after the Commission makes a decision to defer a decision on an institution’s application
for accreditation renewal.

E. Show Cause Directive: DEAC provides written notice of the Commission’s issuance of
a Show Cause Directive to the U.S. Secretary of Education, the appropriate state
licensing or authorizing agencies, and the appropriate accrediting organizations, and the
public (through the DEAC website) at the same time it notifies the institution of the
decision, but no later than 30 days after the Commission makes a decision to place an
institution on Show Cause. DEAC requires the institution that is subject to the show
cause directive to disclose the action to all current and prospective students within seven
business days of receipt of the written notice of the show cause order. Such notice must,
at minimum, meet the requirements of Section XVI.A.2. below.

F. Public Notice. DEAC publishes on its website, including on its directory of institutions
page, notice of any of the decisions listed above within thirty days of the Commission’s
decision. The notice provides a summary of the reasons for the decision and the date, if
any, on which the institution is next subject to a review.

G. Additional Information Regarding Adverse Actions. Within 60 days after a

Commission decision to deny or withdraw accreditation becomes final, DEAC makes
available to the U.S. Secretary of Education, the appropriate state licensing agencies, the
appropriate accrediting organizations, and the public a brief statement summarizing the
reasons for the Commission’s decision and the official comments, if any, that the
affected institution makes regarding such decision. If no official comments by the
institution are provided within 14 days of notification, DEAC will document that the
affected institution was offered the opportunity to provide an official comment.

H. Resigning or Voluntarily Withdrawing Accreditation: Within 10 business days of

receiving notification from an institution of its decision to resign or voluntarily withdraw
from DEAC accreditation, DEAC posts a notice of the institution’s resignation or
voluntary withdrawal of accreditation on its website and provides written notice to the
U.S. Secretary of Education, appropriate state licensing agencies or authorizing agency,
and the appropriate accrediting organizations.

I. Accreditation Lapses: If an institution elects not to renew its accreditation, DEAC

posts notice on its website within 10 business days of the date upon which the
institution’s accreditation lapses and provides written notice to the U.S. Secretary of
Education, appropriate state licensing agencies or authorizing agency, and the
appropriate accrediting organizations.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 40
J. Potential Institutional Malfeasance. DEAC submits to the U.S. Secretary of Education
the name of any institution it accredits that DEAC has reason to believe is failing to
meet its FSA Title IV responsibilities or is engaging in fraud, abuse, or other unethical
conduct along with DEAC’s reasons for concern about the institution’s activities. In
addition, DEAC informs the U.S. Secretary of Education whenever it finds significant or
systemic deficiencies in the institution’s assignment of credit hours.

K. Scope of Public Information: DEAC will make available to the public and in certain
official DEAC publications, including its website and published DEAC Directory of
Accredited Institutions, the following information:

the name, address, phone number, and website address of an accredited institution;
the month and year accredited and month and year for accreditation renewal;
a summary list of programs offered by the institution;
a summary of information pertaining to a deferral of accreditation;
a summary of information pertaining to a show cause directive;
a summary of information pertaining to an initiated or final adverse action;
a summary of information pertaining to an action subject to appeal; and
the date of an institution’s voluntary withdrawal of accreditation.

L. Sharing Information with Government Entities and Other Accrediting

Organizations: DEAC, upon request, shares with other appropriately recognized
accrediting agencies and recognized state agencies information about the accreditation
status of a DEAC-accredited institution and any adverse actions or show cause directives
it has issued or initiated with respect to that institution. Without limiting the foregoing,
DEAC grants all reasonable special requests for accreditation information made by other
accrediting organizations and government entities.

M. Institutional Release of DEAC Regarding Sharing of Information. Institutions

accredited by or seeking accreditation from DEAC provide, as part of their application
for accreditation, a release from liability of DEAC with respect to all actions taken by
DEAC to elicit, receive, review, and share information from state or federal regulatory
agencies, other government entities, third-party accrediting and licensing organizations,
employers, businesses, students, and other third parties in connection with and for the
purposes of evaluating the institution.

N. Authorized Disclosure of Information: When an institution requests specific

confidential accreditation information to be released to third parties, the president/CEO
of the institution or an institution-designated official must provide a written release on
official letterhead to the executive director stating the precise information to be released
and the party or parties to whom the information is to be provided. DEAC will release
such information (1) subject to any qualifications or restrictions it may elect to provide
with respect to the disclosure and (2) to the extent that release of the information can be
effected with minimal cost and effort and does not disclose confidential DEAC or third-

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 41
 party information.

O. Routine Disclosures to the U.S. Department of Education: DEAC provides the

following information to the U.S. Department of Education as a matter of course:
A list, updated annually, of its accredited institutions and programs, which
may be provided electronically.
A copy of the DEAC Directory of Accredited Institutions (updated annually).
A summary of DEAC’s major accrediting activities during the previous year
(an annual data summary), if requested by the U.S. Secretary of Education.
Any proposed change in DEAC’s procedures or accreditation standards that
might alter its scope of recognition or compliance with the federal criteria for
recognition.
The name of any institution that DEAC accredits that has been “certified” by
DEAC as being eligible for participation in Federal Student Assistance (FSA)
Title IV programs under DEAC’s FSA Title IV Programs substantive change
procedure.
If the U.S. Secretary of Education requests, information that may bear upon an
accredited institution’s compliance with its FSA Title IV responsibilities,
including the eligibility of the institution to participate in Federal Student
Assistance Title IV programs or a significant or systematic noncompliance in
the assignment of credit hours.
Within 30 days of becoming aware that an institution has experienced an
increase in enrollment of 50 percent or more within an institutional fiscal year.

P. Specific Disclosures to Institutions. DEAC reviews on a case-by-case basis whether or

not to notify an institution when DEAC has provided information or materials to or
otherwise has had contact with the U.S. Department of Education relating to potential
malfeasance and/or an institution’s eligibility for participation in FSA Title IV programs
or compliance with the terms of such programs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, DEAC
treats a contact or request from the U.S. Department of Education for information
concerning an institution as being confidential, upon the specific request of the
Department.

XVI. PUBLIC DISCLOSURES BY INSTITUTION

A. Disclosures of Accreditation Status. Institutions may only refer to their accreditation

status as set forth below based on the specific scope of their accreditation.

1. Accredited. An institution which has been accredited by DEAC may refer to its
accredited status as follows:

Accredited by the Distance Education Accrediting Commission

DEAC Accredited

2. Accredited but Operating Under Show Cause Directive. If an institution that has

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 42
 been accredited by DEAC is operating under a show cause directive, the institution
must amend any public notice of its accreditation status by adding clear and
conspicuous language stating that the institution is operating under the show cause
directive and the scope of that directive. Within seven business days following its
receipt of the show cause directive from DEAC, the institution must also notify its
students and prospective students that it is operating under a show cause directive
(and the scope of the directive) by publication on its website and by individual
written notice to enrolled students, which notice may be via email if the institution
believes that its email address for the student is current or by first class mail if the
institution has no current email address for the student.

3. Notice to Students of Adverse Actions. Within seven business days following its
receipt of notice from DEAC that the Commission has initiated an adverse action to
deny reaccreditation or withdraw accreditation from the institution, the institution
must promptly notify its students and prospective students of DEAC’s initiation of
such adverse action by publication on the institution’s website and by individual
written notice to enrolled students, which notice may be via email if the institution
believes that its email address for the student is current or by first class mail if the
institution has no current email address for the student. The institution may also, in
that notice, indicate whether the institution plans to appeal the Commission’s
decision or whether an appeal is pending, as applicable, and that the institution’s
accreditation remains in place during such appeals proceedings. The institution shall
update that notice as applicable.

Without limiting the foregoing, if an adverse action becomes final after the appeal
has been concluded or if the institution elects not to appeal the Commission’s
decision, DEAC shall so notify the institution and the institution must follow the
same reporting and notice requirements as are applicable above with respect to the
initiation of an adverse action by the Commission.

B. Additional Disclosure Requirements. Institutions must disclose to the public,

including on its website in a clear, conspicuous and readily accessible manner, certain
additional information as required by state/federal regulation or DEAC requirement,
including, without limitation, disclosures required under the accreditation standards and
DEAC’s website checklist (see DEAC website).

C. Correction of Misleading or Inaccurate Information. DEAC requires that an

accredited institution correct any misleading or inaccurate information it provides to
third parties relating to (a) the institution’s accreditation status, DEAC, or the DEAC
accreditation process or (b) other information that an institution may be required to
disclose under DEAC policies, DEAC accreditation standards, or federal/state
regulations. DEAC will notify the institution of any misleading or inaccurate
information that comes to DEAC’s attention and request that the institution immediately
make the correction, post a notice of the correction, and document to DEAC that the
correction has been made. Failure to do so within 10 days may result in an order of a
special visit or other disciplinary review action, including but not limited to, the issuance

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 43
 of a show cause directive.

XVII. INTERIM MONITORING OF ACCREDITED INSTITUTIONS

An institution maintains its accreditation by remaining in continuous and timely compliance
with all DEAC accreditation standards and eligibility requirements; all DEAC reporting
requirements; all applicable local, state, and federal requirements; and its payment
obligations to DEAC. DEAC monitors and evaluates an institution’s ongoing compliance
with DEAC’s accreditation standards through both formal and informal processes, including,
without limitation, those set forth below in this Section, the self-reporting obligations of the
institution set forth within Section XVII, and the procedural requirements relating to
substantive changes (see Section XVIII).

The Commission reserves the right to order a comprehensive or focused review of an

institution whenever it has reason to believe that the institution may not be in compliance
with DEAC accreditation standards and/or procedures. In all cases, DEAC affords the
institution an opportunity to respond within a reasonable time frame to any findings that the
evaluation team may make based on such review before the Commission makes a decision
regarding the institution’s accredited status.

A. Annual Reports: Each year, DEAC requires the submission of an annual report by each
institution holding accreditation status as of December 31 of any given year (see Section
XVII.A.8. below). The annual report and all accompanying documentation are due to
DEAC in accordance with formats and timelines published or otherwise provided by
DEAC. To the extent that the annual report reflects a significant change in any metric,
including, by way of example, enrollment figures or number of programs, the institution
must address, within the annual report, the reasons for, impact of, and internal response to
the change. Without limiting the foregoing, DEAC provides the following guidelines to
institutions with respect to the threshold changes in enrollments, program numbers, and
student satisfaction percentages that automatically trigger a requirement for a more
extended response and explanation.

1. Significant Growth or Decline in Enrollments: DEAC defines significant growth in

enrollments as an increase in enrollment of more than 50% in one institutional year
(pro-rated as necessary to complete the institution’s annual report and updated within
30 days following the end of the institution’s institutional year where that is not the
calendar year.

2. If an institution reports “significant growth in enrollments,” it must: (a) explain in

detail in the annual report the reason(s) for the growth and what additional staff,
faculty, administrators, educational and student support services, financial resources,
and marketing plans were employed to meet the needs of the increased number of
students being served; (b) identify the programs experiencing the most growth by
indicating the percentage of growth since the last annual report, listing the reasons for
the growth in the identified programs and explaining the institution’s plans for
accommodating the enrollment growth; and (c) describe any strategic plan or other
response the institution is considering or has implemented to address the increase in

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 44
 enrollment numbers.

3. If an institution reports “significant decline in enrollments,” it must explain in detail

in the annual report the reason(s) for the decline; the impact on staff, faculty,
administrators, educational and student support services, financial resources, and
marketing plans; and any strategic plan or other response the institution is considering
or has implemented to address the decline.

4. A “significant decline in enrollments” is defined as an enrollment decline of 25

percent or more since the last annual report.

5. Significant Growth or Decline in the Number of Programs: DEAC defines growth

in the number of programs as significant if, in a calendar year,

an institution offering 1-3 programs adds more than two new programs;
an institution offering 4-10 programs adds more than three new programs;
an institution offering 11-20 programs adds more than four new programs;
an institution offering 21 or more programs adds more than six new programs.

6. If an institution reports “significant growth in the number of programs,” it must

explain in detail in the annual report the reason(s) for the growth and what additional
staff, faculty, administrators, educational and student support services, financial
resources, and marketing plans were employed to meet the needs of the increased
number of programs being offered, as well as what strategic plans the institution is
considering or has implemented to support, continue or limit the growth in programs.

7. If an institution reports “significant decrease in the number of programs,” it must

explain in detail in the annual report the reason(s) for discontinuing programs and the
impact on staff, faculty, administrators, educational and student support services,
financial resources, and marketing plans, as well as what strategic plans the institution
is considering or has implemented to address the decline in program numbers. A
“significant decline in the number of programs” is defined as discontinuing 25
percent or more of its programs since the last annual report.

8. A “program” is a non-degree vocational or certificate program (e.g., medical billing

and coding) or a degree program (e.g., Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice).

9. Significant Changes in Financial Condition: The annual report requires the

submission of audited financial statements and additional financial information.

a. An institution participating in Federal Student Assistance Title IV programs

reports additional information describing its participation and submits audited
comparative financial statements, including its compliance audit for its most
recent fiscal year, within 180 days following the end of the fiscal year.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 45
 b. An institution submits audited or reviewed financial statements for the two most
recent fiscal years prepared on a comparative basis and in accordance with
Section XI. Financial Responsibility standards. DEAC reviews the financial
statements and determines whether further reporting is required or other
appropriate action is necessary.

c. All institutions are required to address and explain any significant change in their
financial condition since the previous year’s annual report.

10. Student Satisfaction Benchmarks: If an institution’s student satisfaction rate falls

below 75 percent, or if completion and graduation rates are not within the
benchmark range for student satisfaction established by DEAC, the institution must
explain the reasons for not meeting established benchmarks and document corrective
actions taken and planned.

11. Commission Review and Follow-Up Action: DEAC staff acknowledge the receipt
of all annual reports and request additional supporting documentation as necessary.
All annual reports are reviewed and summarized by the staff, and significant
changes are reported and presented to the Commission. Annually, at its mid-year
meeting, the Commission considers any significant, salient items reported by
institutions and initiates further follow-up actions as necessary. These may include:

placing limits on an institution’s future enrollment or program growth if

ongoing compliance with DEAC accreditation standards or procedures is a
concern;

requesting an institution to provide additional supporting documentation

regarding significant growth or decline in enrollments or programs; and/or

requesting additional information on any part or parts of an institution’s

annual report.

B. Title IV Program Compliance. DEAC reviews information provided by an institution

participating in Federal Student Assistance Title IV programs to verify (1) continued
compliance with its federal student assistance program responsibilities based on the most
recent “official cohort default rates” published by the U.S. Department of Education, (2)
results of its audited comparative financial statements, and (3) its compliance audit,
program review information, and any other information provided to DEAC by the U.S.
Department of Education. DEAC will investigate and the Commission will direct such
further action as appropriate if an institution appears to be noncompliant with its FSA
Title IV requirements. DEAC is obligated under federal regulations [CFR 602.27(a)(6)]
to report to the U.S. Secretary of Education an institution it has reason to believe is
failing to meet its Federal Student Assistance Title IV program responsibilities or is
engaged in fraud or abuse.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 46
 C. Actions by Other Accrediting Agencies. If another accrediting agency places an
institution on probation or withdraws/revokes the accreditation of the institution or
program, DEAC will promptly review the accreditation status it has previously granted to
that institution to determine whether there is cause to change that status.

D. Actions by State Agencies. DEAC reviews and takes appropriate action regarding the
accreditation status of any institution for which DEAC has received information from the
appropriate state agency that the institution is subject to any of the following actions:

1. An action by a state agency potentially leading to the suspension,

withdrawal/revocation, or termination of the institution’s legal authority to provide
postsecondary education.

2. An action by a state agency to suspend, withdraw/revoke, or terminate the

institution’s legal authority to provide postsecondary education subject to appeal. If a
DEAC-accredited institution loses its licensure/authorization in its state of domicile,
its accreditation is automatically withdrawn as of the date of the loss of state
licensure/authorization. Such a withdrawal of accreditation may be appealed by an
institution pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section XII.

E. Notification Reports: An institution must immediately notify DEAC, in writing, of any

actions the institution plans to take or has taken, or of actions taken or expected to be
taken against it by any accrediting, licensing, or state agency if those actions have the
capacity to affect the compliance of the institution with DEAC accreditation standards
and/or the reputation of the institution or DEAC, either directly or indirectly (e.g.,
through media coverage). This includes the institution’s resolution of any complaints in a
forthright, prompt, amicable, and equitable manner to DEAC’s satisfaction.

XVIII. SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES

A. Scope and Definition. A substantive change is one that may significantly affect an
institution’s quality, mission, scope, operations including primary methods of delivering
programs, or control. Substantive changes are reviewed to ensure that changes in educational
offerings, teaching modalities, locations, scope of offerings, and control of the institution are
or will be made in compliance with DEAC accreditation standards. A substantive change
must be approved by the Commission or DEAC senior staff before the change can be
included in the institution’s scope of accreditation. Institutions currently operating under a
show cause directive may not implement a substantive change unless such change is required
to cure an identified deficiency and is approved by the Commission. Similar restrictions may
be included in deferral notices, as determined on a case-by-case basis.

The actions listed below are considered substantive changes that require DEAC approval.
Institutions should note that DEAC does not allow institutions to establish an “additional
location” or a “branch” as these terms are defined in 34 CFR 600.2. 2

2
DEAC provides the U.S. Department of Education’s definitions in the Glossary found in Part Four of the Accreditation Handbook.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 47
 1. Any substantive change in the established mission or objectives of the institution.
2. Any change in the institution’s name.
3. Any change in the institution’s legal status, form of control, or ownership.
4. Any change in the institution’s location of the main facility, headquarters, or
administrative site or addition of a facility geographically apart from the main facility.
5. Any addition of a direct assessment program, whether or not direct assessment is
already offered in connection with other programs.
6. Any addition of a new program in a field related to a field of study already within the
scope of the institution’s accreditation.
7. Any addition of programs that represent a significant departure from the existing
offerings or educational programs or method of delivery from those that were offered
or used when the agency last evaluated the institution for accreditation.
8. Entry by an institution participating in an FSA Title IV program into a written
arrangement under 34 CFR 668.5 where an institution or organization not certified to
participate in the Title IV HEA programs offers more than 25 percent and up to 50
percent of one or more of the Title IV participating institution’s educational
programs.
9. Any addition of a program at a degree or credential level different from the
educational offerings currently included in the institution’s scope of accreditation.
10. A change in the way an institution measures student progress, including whether the
institution measures progress in clock hours or credit hours, semesters, trimesters, or
quarters, or uses time-based or non-time-based methods.
11. A substantial increase or decrease in the number of clock or credit hours awarded for
successful completion of a program or a change from clock hours to credit hours to
measure student progress in one or more programs.
12. Any addition of an in-residence program component.
13. Any addition of a new division.
14. The acquisition of any other institution or any program or location of another
institution by the institution, an affiliate of the institution, or the institution’s holding
company.
15. Entering into a written arrangement with another accredited organization or an
unaccredited organization to provide more than 25 percent and up to 50 percent of
one or more of the institution’s educational programs.
16. An institution seeking certification to participate in Federal Student Assistance (FSA)
Title IV programs.
17. Any new engagement in international activities beyond that included in the
institution’s existing grant of accreditation.
18. Any other change that may significantly affect an institution’s quality; mission;
scope; operations, including primary methods of delivering programs; or control.

B. Institutions that have been subject to show cause orders over the prior three academic
years, must receive prior approval for the following additional changes (all other institutions
must report these changes within 30 days to DEAC):

(1) An aggregate change of 25 percent or more of the clock hours, credit hours, or content of

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 48
a program since the agency's most recent accreditation review.

(2) Entering into a written arrangement under which an institution or organization not
certified to participate in the Title IV, HEA programs offers up to 25 percent of one or more
of the institution's educational programs.

Where reporting is required, institutions should submit a letter to DEAC at least 30 days prior
to implementation of the change providing the specifics of the change, including, without
limitation, impacted courses, the reason for the change, and the faculty responsible for
reviewing the changes and certifying that these are the only revisions to the course or
program being proposed.

C. Process for Seeking Approval of Substantive Changes.

1. Filing of Applicable Form and Review Process. A more detailed description of the
categories of substantive changes covered by this Section XVIII and the process for
seeking approval of those changes is set forth below in Section XIX.

2. With respect to applications for approval of a written arrangement with another

accredited organization or an unaccredited organization to provide more than 25
percent and up to 50 percent of one or more of the institution’s educational programs,
DEAC will make a final decision within 90 days of receipt of a materially complete
application, unless it determines that significant circumstances related to the
substantive change require further review, to occur within 180 days.

3. Substantive Change Approvals Delegated to DEAC Senior Staff. Certain substantive

changes may be evaluated by DEAC senior staff rather than the Commission. Any
such delegation of authority shall be made by the Commission in its sole discretion.
Such substantive changes include:
a. a change in the institution’s name;
b. the addition of a new program in a field related to a field of study already
within the scope of the institution’s accreditation;
c. any new engagement in international activities beyond that included in the
institution’s existing grant of accreditation; and
d. any change in the institution’s location of the main facility, headquarters or
administrative site, or any addition of a facility geographically apart from the
main facility.

With respect to any request for a substantive change delegated to DEAC staff, the
staff may approve such change, which approval shall have the same effect as if made
by the Commission or refer the substantive change to the Commission for review and
disposition.

4. Approvals with Subsequent Site Visit Requirements. With respect to certain

substantive changes approved by the Commission, DEAC requires an on-site visit
within six to 12 months following the school’s implementation of the change to

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 49
 determine the impact of the change on the institution’s continued compliance with
DEAC accreditation standards. The institution is required to submit a report providing
information specific to the impact of the change prior to the onsite visit. The
institution shall also have a reasonable opportunity to respond to the on-site team’s
findings prior to the Commission’s evaluation of whether the institution has remained
in compliance with DEAC accreditation standards.

5. Notification of Decision. After evaluating the review file for the proposed
substantive change, the Commission (or DEAC staff) determines whether or not and
the extent to which the change, when implemented, is likely to affect the compliance
of the institution with DEAC accreditation standards is consistent with the
institution’s mission, and will not be detrimental to students. On that basis, the
Commission (or DEAC staff) determines whether to approve or deny the change or
require additional review. DEAC notifies the institution in writing within 30 days of
such determination and the effective date. The notice includes a summary of the
reasons for the decision and, if further review is required, the parameters of that
review including, without limitation, the information and other materials to be
provided by the institution and the time frame for the same. DEAC also notifies the
USDE and other relevant third parties of a decision to approve or deny a substantive
change when required to do so by applicable regulations or when otherwise deemed
appropriate by DEAC in its sole and exclusive discretion.

6. In the event of a denial by the Commission of a proposed substantive change, an

institution may appeal the Commission’s decision to an independent appeals panel
pursuant to the provisions of Section XII or take actions designed to address the
Commission’s identified concerns and resubmit the proposal for substantive change,
as supported by the revised record. Denials of substantive changes are not considered
adverse actions but are subject to DEAC’s appeal procedures.

D. Cumulative Changes. Proposed changes or an accumulation of changes implemented

or proposed during an institution’s accreditation term may be so significant as to
effectively transform the institution, requiring a comprehensive re-evaluation of the
institution. Examples of accumulation of changes which would trigger such a new
evaluation include but are not limited to: (1) if an institution proposes to materially
change its mission and to make material changes to its curriculum and/or method of
delivery, (2) if an institution adds programs that represent a significant departure from
its existing offerings, adds a new division or in-residence component, and changes the
way in which it measures student progress, (3) if an institution adds new degree or
credential offerings and enters into a written arrangement with another organization to
provide more than 25% of the institution’s programs, or (4) any similar combination of
substantive changes which, together, significantly alter the educational profile,
pedagogical approach, targeted student population, or program offerings. In such event,
DEAC will notify the institution and offer the institution an opportunity to provide,
within a reasonable time frame, additional information and/or material to demonstrate
that the impact of the changes, singly or cumulatively, is not so extensive as to alter its
essential mission, character, operations, or performance. Only after reviewing the

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 50
 institution’s response will the Commission make a final decision on whether or not to
order a comprehensive or more limited review of the institution.

XIX. PROCESS WITH RESPECT TO EACH SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE

The application forms for each category of substantive change for which an institution seeks
approval can be found on the DEAC website. Substantive changes are reviewed to ensure
that the proposed changes can be implemented and supported by the institution in compliance
with DEAC accreditation standards. With respect to most categories of substantive change,
the process for applying for approval is set forth below (the “Standard Substantive Change
Approval Process”):

1) The institution files its application for approval of the proposed change, together with
all required supporting documentation, at least 30 days prior to the expected effective
date of the change. DEAC staff reviews the application for completeness and requests
additional information from the institution as appropriate.

2) The Commission reviews the application and makes a decision whether or not to
grant approval of the proposed change, request additional information, defer, or to
deny the institution’s request. A decision to deny the request may be appealed by the
institution.

3) If the application is approved, DEAC may require an on-site visit to occur within six
to twelve months following the expected date of implementation of the change to
ensure the change, as implemented, did not detrimentally impact the institution’s
compliance with DEAC accreditation standards. In such cases, the institution submits
at least five weeks prior to the scheduled on-site evaluation a report on the effect of
the substantive change on the institution’s compliance with DEAC accreditation
standards together with any supporting documentation required by the report.

4) The institution receives a copy of the Chair’s Report setting forth the findings of the
on-site evaluation team and is afforded 30 days in which to respond to such report.
The response may include such additional data, information, materials, and
supporting documentation as the institution deems relevant.

5) The Commission reviews the substantive change Record, to include the Chair’s
Report and institutional response, and either determines that the institution has
remained in compliance with DEAC accreditation standards following
implementation of the substantive change, or takes action in accordance with Section
X. In either case, DEAC sends a letter to the institution, within 30 days following the
Commission’s decision that notifies them of the decision and sets forth the basis for
the same. As applicable, DEAC provides notice to the U.S. Secretary of Education
and other relevant constituencies in accordance with its notification and information-
sharing procedures.

A. Change of Core Mission or Objectives

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 51
 1. An institution seeking to substantively depart from its core mission or objectives
requires prior approval because the institution’s accreditation is predicated on its
core mission.

2. A significant alteration in the institution’s core mission or objectives signals a

change throughout the institution. Accordingly, in reviewing an institution’s
proposed change in its core mission or objectives, the Commission will be
evaluating the institution’s application based on a demonstration that the
institution’s proposed change is supported by its operations and infrastructure and
is otherwise in compliance with DEAC accreditation standards.

3. An institution seeking approval for a change in its core mission or objectives

follows the standard substantive change process.

B. Change of Name
1. An institution seeking to change its name is required to obtain approval from the
Commission before adopting the new name. The Commission determines whether
the proposed new name will have an adverse or misleading effect on public
perception of the institution or the institution’s capacity to meet DEAC
accreditation standards. Institutions seeking a change of name to include
“university” or “college” must have DEAC approval as a degree-granting
institution.

2. An institution seeking approval for a change in its name follows the standard
substantive change process.

C. Change in Legal Status, Form of Control, or Ownership of Institution:

Accreditation does not automatically transfer to an institution when all or a majority
share of its interests are sold or when an institution is sold or changes its legal status.
If the new ownership desires to continue the institution’s accreditation, it must notify
DEAC and receive DEAC approval before the change is made. Failure to obtain
approval results in withdrawal of institutional accreditation as of the date the change
of legal status, control, or ownership occurs.

1. Change in Legal Status Definition: A “change in legal status” is defined as a

change in the legal definition of the company or corporation, which is typically
defined by the state or United States government, such as changing from a for-
profit to a nonprofit or from an S Corporation to an LLC.

2. Control Definition: “Control” is the ability to direct or cause the direction of the
actions of an institution. Examples of change of “form of control” are (1) the sale
of all or majority interest of the institution’s assets, (2) sale or assignment of the
controlling interest of the voting stock of a corporation that owns the institution or
that controls the institution through one or more subsidiaries, (3) merger or
consolidation of the institution with other institutions, or (4) an independent
corporation owning an institution that becomes a subsidiary of another

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 52
 corporation with a different ownership. When an institution changes its form of
control, as defined as the ability to direct or cause the direction of the actions of
an institution, it is essentially changing ownership.

3. Change of Ownership Definition: A “change of ownership” is any transaction or

combination of transactions that would result in a change in the control of an
accredited institution.

4. A proposed transfer of ownership is approved based on the new owners,

governing board members, and administrators possessing the capacity to own and
operate a DEAC-accredited institution. The new ownership’s financial condition
includes sufficient resources to continue sound institutional operations in
fulfillment of all commitments to enrolled students. The financial stability allows
the institution to remain in compliance with DEAC accreditation standards.

5. The institution’s proposed new owners, governing board members, and

administrators possess sound reputations and show a record of integrity and
ethical conduct in their professional activities, business operations, and relations.
The proposed new owners, board members, officials, and executive staff are free
from any association with misfeasance, including any government enforcement
action, owning, managing, or controlling any educational institutions that entered
into bankruptcy or closed, to the detriment of the students.

6. An institution authorized for and participating in Federal Student Assistance Title

IV programs assumes the responsibility of ensuring timely notification and
submission of reports to DEAC to facilitate a seamless transfer of ownership and
continuation of institutional eligibility. The Change of Legal Status, Control, or
Ownership Report requires that copies of filings and submissions to the U.S.
Department of Education be included, along with any correspondence received
from the Department. The U.S. Department of Education has time-sensitive
regulations regarding change of legal status, control, or ownership for institutions
participating in federal student aid programs.

7. An institution seeking approval for a change legal status, form of control, or

ownership follows the standard substantive change process. Without limiting the
foregoing, the institution must notify DEAC in writing within 10 days following the
effective date of its change in legal status, form of control, or ownership and receive
an on-site evaluation within six months of the transaction closing.

D. Change of Location

1. An institution seeking a change of location (however close to the original site) is

required to obtain prior approval from DEAC staff.

2. The institution provides evidence that it has state approval for the activity that it

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 53
 conducts at the new location.

3. An institution seeking approval for a change in location follows the standard

substantive change process.

E. New Administrative Site

1. Administrative Site Definition: An “administrative site” is a separate physical

facility located geographically apart from the main headquarters location where
the institution maintains managerial and support activities in areas such as budget
and finance, information technology, human resources, marketing, or legal
counsel. Neither educational programs nor instructional services to students are
offered from an administrative site. Administrative sites are not listed in DEAC’s
Directory of Accredited Institutions. The institution provides evidence that it has
state approval for all the activities that it conducts at the administrative site.
2. An institution seeking approval for a new administrative site follows the standard
substantive change process.
F. Change in Educational Offerings
The following are considered substantive changes to educational offerings. DEAC
expects that proposed programs are developed and ready for implementation at the
time of the request. If an in-residence component is included in the instructional
design of a new program, the institution must follow the Addition of an In-Residence
Training Component substantive change.

1. Addition of a New Degree Program in a Related Field: This involves any

addition of a new degree program in a related field of study consistent with the
educational offerings reviewed when the institution was last evaluated. This
substantive change also includes the addition of a concentration or major to an
existing program when unique program outcomes are distinctly related to the
additional field of study.

These are the steps for obtaining Commission approval for the addition of a
new degree program in a related field of study:

a. Submit a Change in Educational Offerings Application. DEAC reviews the

application and selects approximately 25 percent of courses required for
review based on the selection criteria under Part Two, Section V. DEAC sends
the institution a letter indicating the courses required for submission. The
institution must submit the courses within 60 days otherwise the application
may expire. The institution will receive an invoice for the review fee.

b. Submit a degree program educational offerings report, including the identified

courses for off-site subject specialist review. The institution receives the off-

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 54
 site subject specialist report and has 90 days to respond to any determination
of partially met or unmet standards.

c. The Commission reviews the entire record associated with the application
being considered for approval, including the initial subject specialist report,
institution’s response, and follow-up subject specialist report, if applicable.
DEAC notifies the institution in writing within 30 days of the Commission’s
action and, as applicable, notifies the U.S. Secretary of Education and other
relevant constituencies in accordance with its notification and information-
sharing procedures.

2. Addition of a New Related-Field Non-Degree Program or Vocational

Program: This involves any addition of a new non-degree program or vocational
program in a related field of study consistent with the educational offerings
reviewed when the institution was last evaluated.

These are the steps for obtaining Commission approval for the addition of a new
non-degree program or vocational program in a related field:

a. Submit a Change in Educational Offerings Application. The institution must

submit the program curriculum within 60 days, otherwise the application may
expire. The institution will receive an invoice for the off-site specialist review
fee.

b. Submit a non-degree educational offerings report. The institution receives the

off-site subject specialist report and has 90 days to respond to any
determination of partially met or unmet standards.

c. The Commission reviews the entire record associated with the application
being considered for approval, including the initial subject specialist report,
institution’s response, and follow-up subject specialist report, if applicable.
The Commission may approve, defer, or deny the application. DEAC notifies
the institution in writing within 30 days of the Commission’s action and, as
applicable, notifies the U.S. Secretary of Education and other relevant
constituencies in accordance with its notification and information-sharing
procedures.

3. Change in Method of Delivery: This involves any change in method of delivery

from when the institution was last evaluated.

These are the steps for obtaining Commission approval for a change in method of
delivery:

a. Submit a Change in Educational Offerings Application. The institution must

submit the program curriculum within 60 days, otherwise the application may
expire. The institution will receive an invoice for the review fee.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 55
 b. Submit a degree or non-degree educational offerings report and access to one
completed program for off-site subject specialist review. The institution
receives the off-site subject specialist report and has 90 days to respond to any
determination of partially met or unmet standards.

c. The Commission reviews the entire record associated with the application
being considered for approval, including the initial subject specialist report,
institution’s response, and follow-up subject specialist report, if applicable.
DEAC notifies the institution in writing within 30 days of the Commission’s
action and, as applicable, notifies the U.S. Secretary of Education and other
relevant constituencies in accordance with its notification and information-
sharing procedures.

4. Contracting for Educational Delivery: Substantive change requirements for an

institution that contracts with an unaccredited organization or organization not
certified to participate in the Title IV HEA programs to provide more than 25
percent of one or more of the institution’s educational programs are applicable to:

an accredited institution that enters into a contract with another accredited

organization or unaccredited entity to provide more than 25 percent up to 50
percent of one or more of the institution’s educational programs, or
an institution certified to participate in Title IV HEA programs that enters into
a contract with an institution or organization not certified to participate in
Title IV programs to provide more than 25 percent up to 50 percent of one or
more of the institution’s educational programs

The process for obtaining DEAC approval for contracting for educational delivery
with an unaccredited organization or organization not certified to participate in
Title IV HEA programs requires the Commission to approve both the proposed
contract for services and the curriculum which the proposed contract is intended
to cover. The Commission must approve the contract for services before it will
review the curriculum proposed within the contract for educational delivery. Both
the contract approval and the curriculum approval must be granted before the
Commission will grant approval for the institution’s entry into the contract. The
process is as follows:

a. Submit a Contracting for Educational Delivery Application. The Commission

reviews the application and all documentation submitted to date and may
approve, defer or deny the application to contract with a third party for
educational delivery. DEAC notifies the institution in writing within 30 days
of the Commission’s action.

b. Contingent upon receiving approval of the contract, the institution submits a

Change in Educational Offerings Application. DEAC reviews the applications
and selects the courses required for review. DEAC sends the institution a

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 56
 letter indicating the courses required for submission based on the selection
criteria in accordance with DEAC procedures for curriculum review. The
institution will receive an invoice for the review fee.

c. The institution submits a degree or non-degree program educational offerings

report, including the identified courses for off-site subject specialist review.
The institution receives the off-site subject specialist report and has 30 days to
respond to any determination of partially met or unmet standards.

d. Upon receipt of the record submitted with respect to the curriculum, the
Commission may approve, defer, or deny the curriculum proposed for the
contract for educational delivery. If the Commission approves the curriculum
and, provided that no intervening circumstances have occurred since the
Commission’s approval of the contract which might require a re-evaluation of
the same, the Commission will grant final approval for the proposed
substantive change. (Examples of such intervening circumstances may include
but are not limited to the introduction of new information relating to either the
accredited institution or the unaccredited institution which raise questions as
to whether either or both can fulfill the proposed contract, a significant change
in enrollment by the accredited institution, or another material event occurring
with respect to the accredited institution.)

e. DEAC notifies the institution in writing within 30 days of the Commission’s

action and, as applicable, notifies the U.S. Secretary of Education and other
relevant constituencies in accordance with its notification and information-
sharing procedures.

5. Contracting for Educational Delivery with an Approved AQC Provider:

Upon Commission approval, an institution seeking to improve or expand its
educational offerings to students can enter into an agreement to incorporate or
contract for educational delivery up to 50 percent of its curriculum with an
approved AQC or Approved Quality Curriculum provider.

An institution seeking to contract 26 percent to 50 percent of its curriculum for

educational delivery with an approved AQC provider follows the steps below.

These are the steps for obtaining Commission approval for contracting for
educational delivery:

a. Submit a Contracting for Educational Delivery Application indicating the

contracted courses selected and additional supporting documentation. The
institution will receive an invoice for the review fee.

b. The Commission reviews all documentation submitted to date and approves or

denies the substantive change in accordance with accreditation standards.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 57
 DEAC notifies the institution in writing within 30 days of the Commission’s
action.

6. Addition of a New Degree Program in an Unrelated Field: This involves any

addition of a new degree program in an unrelated field of study not currently
approved within the institution’s scope of accreditation.

These are the steps for obtaining Commission approval for the addition of a new
degree program in an unrelated field of study:

a. Submit a Change in Educational Offerings Application. DEAC reviews the

application and selects fifty percent of the courses required for review based
on the selection criteria under Section V. DEAC sends the institution a letter
indicating the courses required for submission. The institution must submit the
courses within 60 days otherwise the application may expire. The institution
will receive an invoice for the review fee.

b. Submit a Degree Educational Offerings Report, including the identified

courses for off-site subject specialist review. The institution receives the off-
site subject specialist report and has 90 days to respond to any determination
of partly met or unmet standards. The Commission reviews the entire record
associated with the application being considered for approval, including the
initial subject specialist report, institution’s response, and follow-up subject
specialist report, if applicable. The Commission may approve, defer, or deny
the new degree program.

c. Post-Approval On-Site Visit: The institution receives an on-site visit six

months to one year after implementing the new degree program and enrolling
students to ensure ongoing compliance with DEAC standards. The institution
receives a Chair’s Report and has 30 days to respond with any additional
information or documentation necessary to support the substantive change.

d. The Commission reviews the representations made by the institution in its

application for the substantive change, to include the Chair’s Report and
institutional response, and either determines that the institution has remained
in compliance with DEAC accreditation standards or takes action in
accordance with Section X. The institution is notified of the Commission’s
decision within 30 days. As applicable, DEAC provides notice to the U.S.
Secretary of Education and other relevant constituencies in accordance with
its notification and information-sharing procedures.

7. Addition of a New Program in an Unrelated-Field for a Non-Degree Program

or Vocational Program: This involves any addition of a new non-degree
program or vocational program in an unrelated field of study not currently
approved within the institution’s scope of accreditation.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 58
 These are the steps for obtaining Commission approval for the addition of a new
non-degree program or vocational program in an unrelated field of study:

a. Submit a Change in Educational Offerings Application. DEAC sends the

institution a letter indicating the courses required for submission. The
institution must submit the program curriculum within 60 days, otherwise the
application may expire. The institution will receive an invoice for the subject
specialist review fee.

b. Submit a Non-degree Educational Offerings Report. The institution receives

the off-site subject specialist report and has 90 days to respond to any
determination of partly met or unmet standards. The Commission reviews the
report and, upon approval, provides notification to the institution within 30
days, permitting enrollment into the non-degree program or vocational course.

c. Post-Approval On-Site Visit: At the discretion of the Commission, the

institution may receive an on-site visit six months to one year after
implementing the new non-degree program or vocational program and
enrolling students. If the Commission requires the visit, the institution
receives a Chair’s Report and has 30 days to respond with any additional
information or documentation necessary to support the substantive change.

d. The Commission reviews the representations made by the institution in its

application for the substantive change, the Chair’s Report and institutional
response, and either determines that the institution has remained in
compliance with DEAC accreditation standards or takes action in accordance
with Section X. The institution is notified of the Commission’s decision
within 30 days. As applicable, DEAC provides notice to the U.S. Secretary of
Education and other relevant constituencies in accordance with its notification
and information-sharing procedures.

8. Addition of a Program at a Different Degree or Credential Level: This

involves any addition of a program at a degree or credential level different from
the educational offerings currently included in the institution’s scope of
accreditation.

These are the steps for obtaining Commission approval for the addition of a
program at a degree or credential level different from the educational offerings
currently included in the institution’s scope of accreditation:

a. Submit a Change in Educational Offerings Application. DEAC reviews the

application and selects approximately fifty percent of the courses required for
review based on the selection criteria under Section V. DEAC sends the
institution a letter indicating the courses required for submission. The
institution must submit the courses within 60 days otherwise the application

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 59
 may expire. The institution will receive an invoice for the review fee.

b. Submit a Degree Educational Offerings Report, including the identified

courses for off-site subject specialist review. The institution receives the off-
site subject specialist report and has 90 days to respond to any determination
of partly met or unmet standards.

c. The Commission reviews the report and, upon approval, provides notification
to the institution within 30 days, permitting enrollment into the program.

d. Post-Approval On-Site Visit: The institution receives an on-site visit six

months to one year after implementing the new program and enrolling
students. The institution receives a Chair’s Report and has 30 days to respond
with any additional information or documentation necessary to support the
substantive change.

e. The Commission reviews the representations made by the institution in its

application for the substantive change, the Chair’s Report and institutional
response, and either determines that the institution has remained in
compliance with DEAC accreditation standards or takes action in accordance
with Section X. The institution is notified of the Commission’s decision
within 30 days. As applicable, DEAC provides notice to the U.S. Secretary of
Education and other relevant constituencies in accordance with its notification
and information-sharing procedures.

G. Academic Units of Measurement

1. Institutions may define their programs in terms of credit hours or clock hours and
thereby adopt a common classification system that is understood and recognized
by the higher education community.

2. Significant Increase or Decrease in Clock or Credit Hours: The alteration of a

course or program that represents significant modification in the objectives or
content of an approved course or program is considered a substantive change. As
a general rule, this means any increase or decrease in clock or credit hours of an
existing course/program from the original date of course/program approval, the
date of approval of a previous substantive change to the course/program, or the
most recent grant of accreditation.

3. Changing from Clock to Credit Hours: An institution changing an educational

offering from clock to credit hours is a substantive change.

4. Changing the Way an Institution Measures Student Progress: This includes

whether the institution measures progress in clock hours or credit-hours,
semesters, trimesters, or quarters or uses time-based or non-time-based methods.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 60
 These are the steps for obtaining Commission approval for these substantive
changes:

a. Submit Change in Educational Offerings Application. DEAC reviews the

application and selects approximately 25 percent of the educational content
that the institution has selected to convert from clock hours to credit hours or
to change in how it measures student progress.

b. The institution’s application and course/program documentation are submitted

to an off-site subject specialist for review. The institution will receive an
invoice for the review fee. The institution receives an off-site subject
specialist report and has 90 days to respond to any determination of partly met
or unmet standards.

c. The Commission reviews all documentation submitted to date and approves or

denies the substantive change in accordance with accreditation standards.
DEAC notifies the institution in writing within 30 days of the Commission’s
action and, as applicable, notifies the U.S. Secretary of Education and other
relevant constituencies in accordance with its notification and information-
sharing procedures.

H. Addition of an In-Residence Program Component

1. This substantive change applies when the fulfillment of the learning outcomes of
a course/program requires in-person delivery of curriculum, learning of certain
manual skills, familiarity with specialized equipment, access to learning
resources, or the application of certain techniques under professional supervision.
DEAC reviews the Addition of an In-Residence Program Application and
evaluates how the residential component complements, enhances, and applies the
knowledge acquired from the approved courses for the program.

2. An institution seeking approval for a new in-residence program component

follows the standard substantive change process.

I. Addition of a New Division

1. Adding a new division under a parent institution that establishes an identity and
program offerings in a subject area or a number of related subject areas that are
different from those offered by the parent institution is a substantive change.

2. These are the steps for obtaining Commission approval for this substantive
change:

a. Submit an Application for a New Division, including required documentation,

30 days prior to the proposed change. The completed application and

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 61
 documentation are presented to the Commission for approval.

b. Identify the programs that are proposed for the new division by submitting the
Application for a Change in Educational Offerings.

c. Post-Approval On-Site Report and Visit. Once the new division and
program(s) are implemented, the institution submits a streamlined SER five
weeks prior to the on-site visit.

d. The institution receives an on-site visit within six months to one year after
implementing the new division and enrolling students. The institution receives
a Chair’s Report and has 30 days to respond with any additional information
or documentation necessary to support the substantive change.

e. The Commission reviews the representations made by the institution in its

application for the substantive change, the substantive change record, to
include the Chair’s Report and institutional response, and either determines
that the institution remains in compliance with DEAC accreditation standards
or takes action in accordance with Section X. The institution is notified of the
Commission’s decision within 30 days. As applicable, DEAC provides notice
to the U.S. Secretary of Education and other relevant constituencies in
accordance with its notification and information-sharing procedures.
J. Engaging in Federal Student Assistance Title IV Programs
The following procedures and guidance are applicable to institutions which seek
to participate in or are already participating in Federal Student Assistance (FSA)
Title IV programs. The procedures and guidelines below are aligned with but do
not replace the published federal requirements for participation in Federal Student
Assistance (FSA) Title IV programs. Where a DEAC requirement is more
stringent than a corresponding federal requirement, the institution should comply
with the DEAC requirement. In no event, however, should institutions comply
with a DEAC requirement if such compliance would make the institution non-
compliant with a federal requirement; any institution encountering such a
potential conflict should promptly notify DEAC’s Director of Accreditation.

1. DEAC limits the percentage of revenue received from federal student assistance
programs in the first year of authorized participation and requires the adoption of
FSA default reduction methods at inception of participating in Title IV programs.
DEAC conducts additional oversight of student loan default levels of any
institution that, in any published cohort year, has a cohort default rate greater than
30 percent. The DEAC’s requirements are more stringent than the published
federal policies, giving DEAC additional insight into the institutions it accredits
that participate in Federal Student Assistance (FSA) Title IV programs.

2. It is DEAC’s expectation that any accredited institution electing to participate in

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 62
 FSA Title IV programs will comply with all federal program responsibilities
under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, as amended, without exception.

3. For each institution that elects to participate in Federal Student Assistance Title
IV programs, DEAC examines (a) the record of the institution’s compliance with
its federal program responsibilities under FSA Title IV regulations, based on the
most recent “official cohort default rates” published by the U.S. Department of
Education; (b) the results of its audited financial statements; and (c) the
institution’s compliance audits, any program reviews conducted by the US
Department of Education, and any other information that the U.S. Department of
Education may provide to DEAC. DEAC takes action, as appropriate, when any
of the information suggests that the institution may be failing to meet DEAC’s
standards.

4. An institution jeopardizes its accredited status with DEAC if it is found by DEAC

or the appropriate federal authorities or a relevant state authority to be in
significant noncompliance with its FSA Title IV program responsibilities or
requirements.

5. Scope of Activity: The institution may elect to become an FSA Title IV program
eligible institution and not participate in any Federal Student Assistance Title IV
programs. Any programs selected for FSA Title IV program participation must
meet the federal minimum requirements for program eligibility, as well as
meeting DEAC’s requirements. (Note: The U.S. Department of Education
considers an eligible institution to be the “sum of its eligible programs.”)

6. Eligibility: The institution that uses, or seeks to use, accreditation by DEAC to

establish eligibility to participate in FSA Title IV programs must first offer
“distance education” courses as defined under the formal definition established by
the U.S. Department of Education.

Any programs the institution selects to be FSA Title IV program eligible must
have been offered in substantially the same length, covering substantially the
same subject matter, during the 24 months prior to the date the institution applies
for Title IV eligibility certification from DEAC.

Any DEAC institution that intends to seek certification of Title IV eligibility from
DEAC must meet all eligibility requirements, including the minimum program
length requirements, expressed in weeks and academic credits, as set forth in the
law and regulations for FSA Title IV program participation.

7. Academic Units of Measurement: DEAC reviews the institution’s policies and

procedures for determining the credit hours as defined in 34 CFR 600.2. DEAC
evaluates the process an institution uses to award credits for courses and programs
and makes a reasonable determination whether the institution’s assignment of
credit hours conforms to commonly accepted practices in higher education.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 63
 8. Licensure: The institution that uses, or seeks to use, accreditation by DEAC to
establish eligibility to participate in FSA Title IV programs must have a charter,
license, or formal authority from all appropriate government bodies to offer its
programs or courses, when such authority is available or required. The loss of
state licensure or required authority to operate results in the simultaneous loss of
DEAC accreditation and Title IV eligibility.

9. Limit on Participation and Significant Growth Triggers: Revenue from all

FSA Title IV programs by eligible institutions may not account for more than 50
percent of an institution’s total revenue during its first 12 months of eligibility for
FSA Title IV program participation, and not more than 75 percent of its revenue
for all subsequent years of participation until such time that the institution (a)
receives renewal of accreditation while participating in Title IV programs and (b)
demonstrates that its three-year cohort default rate and financial statement
composite score fall within acceptable ranges as prescribed by the U.S.
Department of Education. Once the institution documents it meets the
aforementioned requirements it may submit a request for the Commission’s
approval to exceed 75 percent of its revenue from FSA Title IV programs. The
Commission, at its next scheduled regular meeting, will consider this record and
the institution’s ongoing compliance with accreditation standards and determine
whether to approve the institution to draw the maximum revenue from FSA Title
IV programs allowed under applicable Title IV regulations. Institutions must
report the percentage of revenues derived from Title IV funds to DEAC using the
same calculation methodology that is used when reporting revenues derived from
Title IV funds to the U.S. Department of Education and as presented in the Title
IV compliance audit.

Revenues received from students who enrolled in an institution’s programs prior

to the date on which FSA Title IV program eligibility was granted and who
subsequently elect to receive FSA Title IV funds will not be included in the
institution’s FSA Title IV program revenues.

An institution that, due to its participation in FSA Title IV programs, experiences

annual growth of more than a 50 percent increase in student enrollments and/or
has more than a 50 percent increase in annual tuition receipts in any calendar year
may be directed to undergo an on-site evaluation, at the discretion of the
Commission.

10. Certification of the Institution by DEAC: An institution seeking to participate

in FSA Title IV programs is required to be certified by DEAC prior to applying to
the U.S. Department of Education. Violation of any provisions of these
procedures, including applying to the U.S. Department of Education without first
seeking and receiving DEAC certification, may subject an institution to corrective
action, special visit, or loss of accreditation.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 64
 These are the steps for requesting Commission approval and certification to
participate in FSA Title IV programs:

a. A key person from the institution attends the DEAC Title IV Financial Aid
Seminar. The institution then submits an Eligibility for Federal Student
Assistance Title IV Program Application.

b. The institution must then submit an Eligibility for Federal Student Assistance
Title IV Program Report that identifies programs intended for participation in
FSA Title IV programs.

c. The institution receives an on-site visit to verify its compliance with federal
minimum requirements and DEAC standards and procedures. The institution
receives a Chair’s Report and has 30 days to respond with any additional
information or documentation necessary to support the substantive change.

d. The Commission reviews the evaluation files for the institution’s application
for Title IV eligibility certification and approves or denies the substantive
change in accordance with accreditation standards. DEAC notifies the
institution in writing within 30 days of the Commission’s action and notifies
the U.S. Department of Education and other relevant constituencies in
accordance with its notification and information-sharing procedures.

11. An institution participating in FSA Title IV programs must pay particular

attention to documenting and demonstrating compliance with the following
federal requirements.

a. Mission: The institution’s educational offerings are in a field of study in which

the institution demonstrates competence.

b. Satisfactory Academic Progress: The institution implements and publishes a

satisfactory academic progress policy that complies with all Federal Student
Assistance Title IV program requirements as stated in current federal regulations.

c. Regular and Substantive Interaction: The institution implements policies and

procedures that assure regular and substantive interaction between students and
faculty in accordance with the federal definition of distance education (see 34
CFR 600 and 34 CFR 668). The institution maintains records to document that
appropriate interactions occur throughout the student’s enrollment.

d. Competency-Based or Direct Assessment Programs: The institution must seek

prior approval for every competency-based or direct assessment program, as well
as for every concentration of each competency-based or direct assessment
program. These programs are subject to the federal definition of distance
education that requires substantial interaction between students and faculty. The
competencies established for such programs build a unified body of knowledge

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 65
 that is consistent with a discipline or profession. Institutions applying for prior
approval use the relevant Change in Educational Offerings application form.

e. Career and Financial Aid Advising: The institution makes available to students,
upon request, career advising related to their program of study. The institution
makes available financial aid advising to all students in need of financial
assistance, students that are applying for financial assistance, and other persons
seeking additional information regarding the process for applying for and
receiving federal student assistance. Such advising may take place via a variety of
media sources and communication methods. Upon request of the student, the
institution provides personal assistance on questions related to the application and
delivery of financial aid.

f. Entrance and Exit Loan Advising: The institution conducts entrance and exit
loan advising that encourages loan repayment. The institution, through the
financial aid office and the use of available media, encourages repayment of any
FSA student loan funds that were obtained for payment of the tuition and other
costs associated with the student’s attendance and enrollment in the institution’s
educational offerings.

g. Disclosures: Any statements the institution makes in any advertising, promotional

literature, or other materials are complete and accurate about (1) its eligibility for
or participation in FSA Title IV programs, (2) its efforts to become certified to
participate in such programs, and/or (3) the availability of FSA Title IV benefits
to students who enroll at the institution. The institution will not use the
availability of FSA Title IV funds to students as the primary inducement or
rationale for students to enroll in a program.

All promotional literature, catalogs, websites, or other materials that describe the
financial assistance available to students, including any FSA Title IV funds that
might be available, must state that the assistance is available only to those
students who qualify and must include the federal and institutional requirements
that students must meet in order to qualify and maintain eligibility for such
assistance.

The institution discloses accurate course material information, including ISBN and
retail prices. The institution’s textbook pricing policy for new or used textbooks is
fair to students.

h. Recruitment Personnel: Institutional personnel involved in the recruitment of

students as their principal activity do not have final decision-making authority in
the approval or awarding of FSA Title IV funds. An institution that participates in
FSA Title IV programs is aware of, and complies with, all U.S. Department of
Education regulations and restrictions on methods of compensation that pertain
directly or indirectly to success in student recruiting or admissions activities or in

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 66
 making financial aid decisions.

i. Refund Policy: The institution has and implements a fair and equitable refund
policy in compliance with state requirements or, in the absence of such
requirements, in accordance with DEAC’s refund policy standards. The institution
discloses the date from which refunds are calculated (e.g., the date of
determination of withdrawal or termination). The institution complies first with
the Return of Title IV requirements when a student who is an FSA Title IV
recipient withdraws from an institution.

j. Federal Student Assistance Administrator: The institution employs a capable

individual(s) responsible for administering all FSA Title IV programs in which it
participates and for coordinating those programs with the institution’s other
financial assistance programs. The institution employs other individuals, as
needed, to assist in the administration of FSA Title IV programs.

k. Default Management Plan: The institution’s default management plan addresses

student loan information (borrower’s rights and responsibilities, information
regarding repayment and consolidation of student loan debt, communications with
lenders and loan servicing agents, and the consequences of default), advising and
monitoring, cooperation with lenders, and collecting information to facilitate
location of borrowers. The institution documents implementation of the default
management program and regularly conducts an evaluation of the effectiveness of
its efforts as part of its self-study program.

The published cohort rate for the institution for any cohort year—where 30 or
more borrowers enter repayment—cannot exceed the allowable rate as prescribed
by the U.S. Department of Education. Institutions that receive a published rate
greater than 25 percent are required to implement and adhere to a default
reduction plan that specifically outlines the means by which the institution will
provide services and contacts to the borrowers in an attempt to reduce the cohort
default rate.

l. Financial Responsibility: The institution meets the financial responsibility and

administrative capability rules for federal financial aid participation, including the
annual submission of audited comparative financial statements for the two most
recent fiscal years, auditor opinion and management letters, and composite score
calculation.

m. Program Reviews: The institution notifies DEAC in writing within 10 days of

having undergone any program reviews, inspections, or other reviews of its
participation in Federal Student Assistance Title IV programs by the U.S.
Department of Education. The institution also provides complete copies of any
reports (both preliminary and final) of these reviews and provides any available
compliance audits within 10 days of its receipt of these documents.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 67
 n. Bankruptcy: An institution that files for federal bankruptcy protection
simultaneously and immediately forfeits its DEAC-accredited status and Federal
Student Assistance Title IV program eligibility.

o. Renewal of Accreditation: Since the length of the FSA Title IV programs

certification extends only through the institution’s current term of accreditation,
the institution must renew its compliance with FSA Title IV programs as part of
its renewal of accreditation. The institution must readdress the FSA Title IV
statements in its Self-Evaluation Report. During the on-site evaluation, an
evaluator with expertise in FSA Title IV programs verifies the information
provided in the Self-Evaluation Report.

K. Engaging in International Activities

1. An institution seeking to add active international functions (e.g., training sites,
recruiting, instruction, marketing, business) outside the United States, add
coordinating offices in another country, or contract with foreign agents or educational
entities is required to obtain prior approval from the Commission.

2. An accredited institution offering educational programs outside of its home country

must obtain all appropriate external approvals where required, including higher
education system administration, and relevant government bodies. The institution
documents the accepted legal basis for its operation in the host country and meets
legal requirements of the host country.

3. An institution seeking approval to engage in international activities follows the

standard substantive change process.

XX. NON-SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES

Non-substantive changes are those changes that require review and confirmation by DEAC
staff prior to implementation but do not require prior approval by the Commission as is the
case for substantive changes. Institutions submit the Non-Substantive Change Request Form,
associated fee payment, and a letter providing any required documentation or information.
Upon review of the non-substantive change request, DEAC may determine that certain
characteristics in the change require that the institution undertake additional reporting
obligations and/or a site visit following implementation of the change in order to ensure that
the change did not have a detrimental impact on the institution’s students, its compliance
with DEAC accreditation standards, and its adherence to its educational mission. The Non-
Substantive Change Request Form and associated fees information can be found on the
DEAC website. The following are non-substantive changes:

A. Change of President/Chief Executive Officer: When an institution makes a change in

its president/CEO, defined as the replacement of the senior-level executive of the
institution since the last accreditation evaluation, it must immediately notify DEAC in

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 68
 writing. The institution must submit the Non-Substantive Change Request Form and a
letter providing a full explanation of when the change of president/CEO is being made,
why it is being made, and how the change will affect the institution’s capacity to continue
to meet all DEAC accreditation standards.

The institution should also include documentation on the qualifications of the new
president/CEO and a summary of the job description. The institution agrees that, as part
of the change of president/CEO, the new president/CEO may be subject to a background
check by DEAC, which may include, but not be limited to, DEAC surveys of state
educational oversight agencies, federal departments and agencies, and consumer
protection agencies, as well as looking at credit history, prior bankruptcy, criminal
background, debarment from Federal Student Assistance Title IV Programs, closing of
educational institutions in which they were managers or principals, or loss of
accreditation or state approval to operate an educational institution. The costs and
expenses of any such background check shall be the responsibility of the institution.

B. Program or Course Revisions: Institutions seeking to change the title, code, content,
requirements, or structure of an existing program or course must submit the Non-
Substantive Change Request Form, associated fee payment, and a letter providing the
requested information as outlined in the circumstances listed below:

1. Program Title Revisions: An institution that changes the title of a program without
changing the instructional content, objectives, or courses comprising the program.

2. Course Title Revisions: An institution that changes the title or code of a course
without changing the instructional content or objectives of the course.

The institution submits a letter providing the reason for the change and certifies that the
title or code changes are the only revisions to the program or course.

3. Existing Program Revisions: An institution that makes changes to the core course
content, sequence, requirements, or structure of an existing program without
substantively changing the outcomes.

The institution submits a letter providing the reason for the change, a curriculum map
identifying and comparing the current and proposed program elements, and a statement
certifying that the program remains aligned with its accredited scope.

4. Adding a Specialization/Emphasis/Concentration to an Existing Program

Comprised of Courses Already Approved: Institutions may determine that it is
appropriate to organize existing courses within an existing program into a
specialization, emphasis, or concentration. The specialization, emphasis, or
concentration does not introduce a new field of study or have unique program
outcomes.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 69
 The institution submits a letter providing the rationale for the implementation; a curriculum
map establishing the courses comprising the specialization/emphasis/concentration; and a
statement certifying that the courses used to create the focus area are the same courses
approved by DEAC as part of the approved program.

DEAC reserves the right to direct the institution to the substantive change process when it
appears that the change notifications outlined above represent a significant departure
from its accredited scope or from the content of the program or course at the time of its
initial approval.

C. Certificate Program Containing Courses Already Approved: Institutions may

determine that it is appropriate to create a certificate program to meet a specific
marketplace need comprised of existing, already approved courses. Courses comprising
the new certificate program must be exactly the same (e.g., require proctored exams, the
same assignments, the same exams) as those offered in an already approved program and
which would allow students to apply earned credits towards another program. The
institution must submit the Non-Substantive Change Request Form, associated fee
payment, and a letter providing:

1. the rationale for the implementation;

2. a curriculum map outlining the scope and sequence of the courses for the certificate-
level credential;

3. a description of program outcomes;

4. evidence that offering the certificate-level credential is aligned with industry

requirements for entering or advancing in a profession; and

5. a statement certifying that the courses used to create the certificate program are the
same courses included by DEAC as part of the institution’s DEAC-approved
program.

D. Changing General Education Requirements or Eliminating a Major Thesis

Requirement: An institution changing general education requirements or eliminating a
major thesis requirement submits the Non-Substantive Change Request Form, associated
fee payment, and a letter outlining the change, the reason for the change, and certifying
that these are the only revisions to the course or program.

E. Contracting for Educational Delivery with an Approved AQC Provider, Accredited

Institution, or Other Entity: An institution can enter into an agreement to contract for
educational delivery of up to 25 percent of its curriculum with an Approved Quality
Curriculum (AQC) provider, an accredited institution, an entity that does not have
accreditation, or organization not certified to participate in Title IV HEA programs by
submitting the Non-Substantive Change Request Form and a letter listing the acquired
courses, the courses that will be replaced, the reason for the change, and the faculty

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 70
 responsible for reviewing and providing instruction and certifying that these are the only
revisions to the course or program.

DEAC reserves the right to direct the institution to the substantive change process when it
appears that the contracting for educational delivery is not with an appropriately
accredited institution.

F. Adding Courses: If an institution adds courses similar to its existing educational

offerings within its DEAC-accredited scope, it submits the Non-Substantive Change
Request Form, associated fee payment, and a letter providing the following information
for each course:

name and number of the course;

number of credits awarded;
core/elective designation;
course description;
faculty and their qualifications to teach the course (submit résumé or curriculum
vitae); and
a rationale for the addition that explains the alignment with existing programs and
institutional mission.

DEAC expects that proposed courses are developed and ready for implementation at the
time of the request.

G. Discontinuing Courses or Programs: If an institution decides to discontinue a course or

program, it submits the Non-Substantive Change Request Form and a letter explaining
the reasons for the change. Programs being discontinued require the inclusion of a
program teach-out plan and information on the number of currently enrolled students.

H. Division Identity: Institutions seeking to organize existing programs into a division that
that will continue to operate as part of the institution must submit the Non-Substantive
Change Request Form, associated fee payment, and a letter providing a complete
description of how the institution will disclose the division as part of the broader
educational offerings and clearly delineate the relationship between the division and the
institution. Institutions seeking to add a division under a parent institution that establishes
a discrete identity from the parent institution must apply for prior approval of a
substantive change and submit the Application for a Division.

DEAC requires that any separately advertised division be listed in the DEAC Directory
of Accredited Institutions.

I. Closure of an Administrative Site: When an institution decides to close an

administrative site, it submits (at least 30 days prior to the closure) the Non-Substantive
Change Request Form and a letter providing the following information:

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 71
 1. Name, address, and telephone number of the site.
2. The date and reason(s) for closing the administrative site.
3. Personnel names, titles, and job descriptions affected by the closing.
4. Information explaining what duties were carried out at the administrative site and
where those duties will be carried out in the future.
5. Information on any significant changes in courses/programs or educational services,
student support services, etc., resulting from the closure of the administrative site.
6. Information on changes to any advertising and promotional materials (including
website) resulting from the closure of the administrative site.
7. If any official documents were kept at the administrative site, explain when and
where the records will be transferred.
8. Evidence that the institution has properly notified the appropriate licensing,
authorizing, or approving state educational agency concerning the closure of the
administrative site.

XXI. TEACH-OUT PLANS

A. Institutions must submit to DEAC for its approval a comprehensive, written teach-out
plan (as defined in 34 CFR 600.2 and as further defined under subsection B below),
for its enrolled students when any of the events listed below occur. In addition, and if
practicable, the institution shall submit a teach-out agreement (as defined in 34 CFR
600.2 and as further defined under subsection C below) if any of the events described
below occur:
1. The U.S. Department of Education has notified DEAC of an action against the
institution pursuant to Federal Regulations, Section 487 (f) [20 USC 1099 b], to
include placing the institution on the reimbursement payment method under 34
CFR 668.162(c) or the heightened cash monitoring payment method requiring a
review of the institution’s supporting documentation under 34 CFR
668.162(d)(2).
2. The U.S. Department of Education has initiated an emergency action against an
institution, in accordance with section 487(c)(1)(G) of the HEA, or an action to
limit, suspend, or terminate an institution’s participation in any Title IV HEA
program.
3. The Secretary notifies the agency that the institution is participating in Title IV
HEA programs under a provisional program participation agreement, and the
Secretary has required a teach-out plan as a condition of participation.
4. The U.S. Department of Education notifies DEAC of a determination by the
institution’s independent auditor expressing doubt about the institution’s ability to
operate as a going concern or indicating an adverse opinion or a finding of
material weakness related to financial stability.
5. DEAC has independently made a determination that the institution appears to lack
sufficient financial resources to sustain effective operation in meeting obligations
to students.
6. The institution enters bankruptcy.
7. DEAC has withdrawn accreditation from the institution.
8. DEAC has directed the institution to show cause as to why its accreditation
should not be withdrawn.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 72
 9. A state licensing or authorizing agency notifies DEAC that the institution’s
license or legal authorization has been or will be revoked or that the state agency
has sanctioned the institution for reasons relevant to the institution’s continued
compliance with DEAC accreditation standards.
10. The institution has notified DEAC that it intends to cease operations.

B. Teach-Out Plan: At a minimum, the proposed teach-out plan must ensure that all
students who are enrolled at the institution receive all of the training or education
under the terms of their contracts, including receiving all learning materials and
student services on a timely basis.

1. There are two approaches to teach-out plans:

a. The institution plans to teach-out its own students.

b. An executed teach-out agreement is in place with one or more appropriately
accredited institutions currently offering programs similar to those offered at
the closing institution.

2. Minimum components for any teach-out plan:

a. A listing by name, student number, email address, and telephone number of

all students in each program, the program requirements each student has
completed, and their estimated completion/graduation dates.
b. The institution’s financial obligations to each student, including without
limitation, unearned tuition, all current refunds due, and account balances.
c. Academic programs offered by the institution and the names of other
institutions that offer similar programs and that could potentially enter into a
teach-out agreement with the institution.
d. Arrangements made for the secure safekeeping of all student records,
including educational, accounting, and financial aid records, in a location that
can be readily accessed by students (with respect to their own records), by
DEAC, and by state and federal regulators, and otherwise in accordance with
applicable legal requirements in the event the institution closes.
e. Without limiting the foregoing, the arrangement with a third-party repository
for student transcripts from which students can obtain copies of their
transcripts for a minimal fee.
f. Instructions on how curricula and learning management software may be
accessed by students if the institution is conducting its own teach-out.
g. An explanation, accompanied by appropriate supporting documentation and
timelines, of how the closing institution will notify students in the event of
closure and, as applicable, how the closing institution will notify the students
of their teach-out options and ability to transfer credits.
h. A copy of all notifications related to the institution’s closure or to teach-out
options to ensure that (i) the information accurately represents students’
ability to transfer credits, and (ii) DEAC may require changes in the language
of the notifications to correct, clarify, or otherwise amend representations in

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 73
 the notification to the extent DEAC becomes aware of information which
suggests such changes are advisable.
i. For institutions offering hybrid programs (distance study and required face-to-
face instruction), an explanation and evidence of how the teach-out institution
has the capacity to provide the students with instruction and services without
requiring the students to move or travel substantial distances from the closing
institution, and evidence of the adequacy of the teach-out institution’s
facilities and equipment.
j. A statement showing evidence that state regulations regarding any student
protection funds and/or bonds are followed, if applicable.
k. A statement that describes any additional charges/fees and notification to
students about the charges/fees.
l. A description of what financial resources will be used to make student refunds
or fund the teach-out.
m. A plan to provide all potentially eligible students with information about how
to obtain a closed school discharge and, if applicable, information on state
refund policies.
n. A record retention plan, to be provided to all enrolled students, that delineates
the final disposition of teach-out records (e.g., student transcripts, billing,
financial aid records).
o. Information on the number and types of credits the teach-out institution is
willing to accept prior to the student’s enrollment.
p. A clear statement to students of the tuition and fees of the educational
program and the number and types of credits that will be accepted by the
teach-out institution.
q. The name, title, email address, telephone number, office address, and other
relevant contact information for the person or persons who will act as the
primary liaison(s) between the institution and DEAC throughout the period of
the teach-out. Such information is to be updated as necessary through the
teach-out period.
3. DEAC notifies the relevant accrediting agency of DEAC’s approval or rejection
of a teach-out plan that includes a program or institution accredited by such other
agency. DEAC also notifies any state, federal or other agency or program which it
has reason to believe may be affected by the teach-out plan.

C. Teach-Out Agreement: When a DEAC institution is required to submit a teach-out

agreement under Section (A) above, the agreement must be approved by DEAC prior to
implementation. DEAC approves teach-out agreements only if the agreement offers
educational services consistent with DEAC accreditation standards and the institution’s
teach-out plan, satisfies the requirements of 34 CFR 600.2 and other state and federal
regulations, and provides for the equitable treatment of students being served. Without
limiting the foregoing, the teach-out institution, whether it is the institution submitting the
plan or another institution providing the teach-out,

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 74
1. Must have the necessary experience, resources, and support services to provide an
educational program that is of acceptable quality and reasonably similar in content,
delivery modality, and scheduling to that provided by the institution that is ceasing
operations either entirely or at one of its locations. However, while an option via an
alternate method of delivery may be made available to students, such an option is not
sufficient unless an option via the same method of delivery as the original educational
program is also provided.
2. Must have the capacity to carry out its mission and meet all obligations to existing
students.
3. Must demonstrate that it:
a. can provide students access to the program and services without requiring them to
move or travel for substantial distances or durations; and
b. will provide students with information about additional charges, if any.
Without limiting the foregoing, the teach-out institution may not be an institution that
itself has been or is required to submit a teach-out plan under Section A above or is under
investigation, subject to an action, or being prosecuted for an issue related to academic
quality, misrepresentation, fraud, or other severe matters by a law enforcement agency.

The following elements are also considered in approving teach-out agreements:

1. The agreement is with one or more institutions accredited by an agency that is

recognized by the U.S. Department of Education and/or the Council for Higher
Education Accreditation (CHEA). The institution is state- licensed and currently
offers programs similar to those at the closing institution.

2. The agreement states that the student will be provided access to all the programs of
instruction, without additional cost, that the student originally contracted and paid for
but did not receive, due to the [pending] closure of the institution. For hybrid
programs, the teach-out institution must be near the closing institution so that the
students are not required to move or travel substantial distances.

3. The agreement clarifies the financial responsibilities of all parties, including the
assumption of any liabilities for tuition refunds and appropriate notification to
students in a timely manner of additional charges/fees, if any.

4. The agreement states whether, upon completion of the program, the student will
receive a diploma, certificate, or degree from the teach-out institution or whether the
diploma or certificate will be awarded by the closing institution.

5. The agreement indicates whether students who (a) had already enrolled but had not
yet started their program of study at the closing institution or (b) are on a leave of
absence from the closing institution, will be entitled to begin training or re-enroll at
the teach-out institution.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 75
 6. The agreement states that the closing institution will provide the teach-out institution
with copies of the following records for the students being taught out:
Enrollment agreements
Financial aid transcripts
Study/progress records
Academic transcripts
Student account records
Any relevant curricular materials

7. The agreement requires that the teach-out institution maintain records and documents
for the students being taught out and that the teach-out institution will report to
DEAC on a periodic basis on the status of the teach-out.

8. The agreement provides for appropriate notification to DEAC and federal and state
authorities.

Notwithstanding the provisions in this section, DEAC may waive requirements

regarding the percentage of credits that must be earned by a student at the institution
awarding the educational credential if the student is completing his/her/their program
through a written teach-out agreement or transfer. Factors DEAC would typically
consider in granting any such waiver would include, without limitation, (1) the
previous coursework completed by the student before the teach-out began, (2)
whether the student had completed all core requirements for the educational
credential, (3) non-academic experience of the student within the field covered by the
educational credential, (4) the evaluation received by the student for the capstone
project required for the credential, if applicable, (5) teacher and/or employer
recommendations, (6) the student’s grades in the applicable field, (7) whether the
student completed coursework in an adjacent or connected field, and (8) hardship to
the student if a waiver is not granted.

D. Closure Without Teach-Out Plan/Agreement: If a DEAC-accredited institution

closes without a teach-out plan/agreement or an institution refuses to provide a teach-
out plan/agreement, DEAC will work with the U.S. Department of Education, the
appropriate state agency, (and other regulatory, governmental, accrediting and
educational entities as DEAC may deem appropriate in its discretion) to the extent
feasible, to assist students in finding reasonable opportunities to complete their
education without additional charges.

XXII. COMPLAINTS (ACCREDITED INSTITUTIONS, ACTIVE APPLICANTS, AND DEAC)

A. Definition of Complaint: A complaint is defined as a written notification to DEAC by

any person or entity that sets forth reasonable and credible information that (1) an
accredited institution; (2) an institution applying for accreditation; or (3) the evaluators,
commissioners, or DEAC staff, are not in compliance with one or more of DEAC’s

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 76
 accreditation standards.

B. Filing a Complaint with DEAC. DEAC’s Online Complaint System enables

individuals to file a complaint directly using the DEAC website. The complaint form is
found at www.deac.org/Student-Center/Complaint-Process.aspx. Written complaints will
also be accepted by mail or other form of effective delivery to DEAC, provided they
include (1) the complainant’s name and contact information (2) the basis of any
allegation of noncompliance with DEAC standards and procedures; (3) all relevant names
and dates and a brief description of the actions forming the basis of the complaint; (4)
copies of any available documents or materials that support the allegations; and (5) a
release authorizing DEAC to forward a copy of the complaint, including identification of
the complainant(s) to the institution.

In cases of anonymous complaints or where the complainant requests confidentiality,

DEAC will consider whether the complainant’s identity is necessary to investigate the
complaint and provide due process to the institution, DEAC will (1) notify complainants
who identify themselves to DEAC but request anonymity if DEAC believes that it cannot
proceed with its investigation without revealing the complainant’s name to the institution,
the Commission, and other relevant entities and (2) wait for authorization from the
complainant to waive anonymity before it takes further action. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, to the extent that an anonymous complaint or a complaint filed where the
complainant will not waive a request for anonymity raises material issues of compliance
by a DEAC accredited institution, DEAC may initiate further fact-finding with respect to
the allegations in the complaint.

C. Complaints Outside of DEAC Scope:

Where issues of educational services, student services, admissions decisions, assignment
of grades or tuition are concerned, DEAC may refer the complainant to the institution to
resolve and only if the institution is unable to resolve the same, will DEAC conduct its
own investigation and seek resolution to the same. Where DEAC believes it is advisable
or appropriate it may also refer the complaint and/or the complainant to a federal or state
agency or private entity with jurisdiction over the subject matter of the complaint, any
such determination will be made by DEAC in its sole discretion. Students filing
complaints musts confirm that they have exhausted the institution’s complaint process
prior to pursuing a complaint with DEAC or must explain to DEAC’s reasonable
satisfaction why pursuing the complaint through the institution’s internal processes would
be unavailing.

DEAC will not intervene on behalf of individuals in cases of a personnel action, nor will
it review an institution’s internal administrative decisions in such matters as admissions
decisions, academic honesty, assignment of grades, and similar matters unless the context
of an allegation suggests that unethical or unprofessional conduct or action may have
occurred that might call into question the institution’s compliance with a DEAC standard
or policy.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 77
 Further, where the alleged circumstances giving rise to the complaint have occurred so
long ago that (1) investigating and ascertaining the facts would be difficult, and (2)
DEAC has reason to believe that the complaint alleges practices or actions which are no
longer present at the institution, DEAC will so inform the complainant and will advise
the complainant that, without further demonstration from the complainant that the
allegations relating to the institution’s compliance with DEAC standards are likely to be
an ongoing threat to the institution’s students, faculty or academic integrity, DEAC is
unlikely to pursue the claim. Decisions made by DEAC in evaluating third party
complaints shall be made in its sole discretion, consistent with the guidelines set forth
above. A summary of DEAC’s disposition of each complaint under this section is
reported to the Commission for review and to take such further action as the Commission
may deem appropriate.

D. Recordkeeping for Complaints: Complaints received against accredited institutions and

the manner of their resolution are kept for two accreditation cycles (8 to 10 years).
Complaints received against initial applicants for accreditation are kept for three years.
DEAC provides summaries of these files to visiting examining committees when they
conduct on-site visits. DEAC also considers these summary files when it acts on an
institution’s application for initial accreditation or renewal of accreditation.

New and/or open complaints are also tabulated and summarized and presented at each
meeting of the Commission. The summary provides an analysis of any unresolved
complaints, and any other information the Commission may request regarding the record
of complaints received by DEAC.

E. Complaints Against Accredited Institutions:

DEAC expects its accredited institutions to have operational procedures in place for fairly
and promptly resolving complaints filed against the institution by students, faculty, or the
public. Therefore, in investigating a specific complaint against an accredited institution
filed directly with DEAC, DEAC also examines whether or not the institution has
effective methods for handling student, faculty, staff and educational problems on a
routine basis and whether such methods are equitable, consistently applied, and effective
in resolving problems.

DEAC is also concerned about the frequency and pattern of complaints about an
accredited institution. DEAC expects the institution to monitor all complaints it receives
and expects the institution to take steps to ensure that similar complaints do not become
repetitive or routine. Institutions are required to maintain the complete files for every
complaint for no less than the longer of five years or the completion of the institution’s
next reaccreditation evaluation cycle.

F. Action: When DEAC receives a complaint against an applicant or accredited institution,

the DEAC’s procedure for handling the complaint consists of the following steps:

1. Within ten business days following receipt of the complaint, DEAC will send a letter

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 78
 or email to the complainant acknowledging receipt of the complaint and explaining
the process that the DEAC will follow in investigating the complaint.

2. DEAC will complete an initial review of the complaint within fifteen business days
following its receipt to determine whether it sets forth information or allegations that
reasonably suggest that an institution may not be in compliance with DEAC’s
standards and procedures. If additional information or clarification is required, before
DEAC believes it can pursue a further investigation of the complaint, DEAC will so
notify the complainant and request the complainant provide the additional
information. Failure of the complainant to provide such additional information may
result in DEAC determining that the complaint cannot be effectively investigated.

3. If DEAC determines after the initial review of the complaint that the information or
allegations do not reasonably demonstrate that an institution is out of compliance with
DEAC standards or procedures or that the complainant has not provided sufficient
information on which DEAC can evaluate it, the complaint will not be further
investigated by DEAC and the complainant will be notified of such a disposition and
the reasons.

4. If DEAC determines after the initial review of the complaint that the information or
allegations reasonably suggest that an institution may not be in compliance with
DEAC standards and procedures, the DEAC will provide a copy of the original
complaint to the institution and direct the institution to provide a response to the
complaint within 30 days following such notice with the following exceptions:

a. In cases of advertising violations, when DEAC staff forwards a copy of the

advertisement at issue to the institution, citing the standard that might have been
violated. The institution is required to respond within 15 days of receiving such
notice.

b. If a news article or media broadcast carries a negative report on a DEAC-

accredited institution, or any of its owners, senior management, or executives, the
institution is required to respond to the statement(s) within 15 days.

c. In cases when the complaints are from students concerning administrative

services, student services, educational services, or tuition, the institution will be
required to respond directly to the student within 15 days to address his/her
concerns. The institution must also respond to DEAC within 15 days; such
response must include, at minimum, a copy of the response sent to the student.

d. The failure of the institution to provide either a response to the complaint or any
additional information as requested by the executive director within the specified
time frames will be considered a violation of DEAC’s policy on complaints and
will be referred to the Commission for consideration and action. The complainant
will be notified when a request for a response from the institution has been
delivered by DEAC.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 79
 5. If, following review of the institutional response to the complaint, DEAC concludes
that the allegations in the complaint have been rebutted or resolved by the institution,
the complainant and the institution will be notified of such resolution.

6. On no less than a semi-annual basis, DEAC will provide the Commission with a list
of all complaints closed by the executive director and a summary of the reasons for
closing each such complaint. The Commission may, in its discretion, elect to reopen
any such complaint for further investigation and resolution.

7. If DEAC concludes following review of the institution’s first response to the

complaint, that the allegations may establish that there has been a violation of DEAC
standards and/or procedures, DEAC may take one of the following actions:

a. Defer resolution on the complaint for a period not to exceed 60 days if there is
evidence that the institution is making progress in rectifying the situation. Failure
by the institution to rectify the situation by the end of the 60-day period will be
referred to the Commission for consideration and action.

b. Notify the institution that, based on the information provided, one or more of the
issues raised by the complaint has been referred to the Commission for further
action.

c. The complainant will be informed of any deferral provided under this section
and/or of whether any issues raised by the complaint have been referred to the
Commission.

8. DEAC will send a letter to the complainant and the institution regarding the final
disposition of each complaint. A record of the complaint and associated documentation
(including any institutional response and additional information provided by the
institution or the complainant together with any materials prepared or collected by
DEAC) is kept on file.

9. An adverse action against an institution arising from a complaint will not be initiated
until the institution has had an opportunity to respond to the complaint within the time
frames set forth by DEAC.

G. Complaints about Applicant Institutions: If DEAC receives a complaint about an

applicant institution, it is treated as a third-party comment pursuant to the procedures set
forth in Section VII.

H. Complaints About DEAC Evaluators, Commissioners, and Staff:

The Board of Directors is responsible for handling complaints against DEAC evaluators,
Commissioners, and/or staff for alleged violations of DEAC’s standards, policies, or code of
conduct. Any member of the Board who is the subject of or implicated by the allegations in

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 80
the complaint must recuse from all discussions, deliberations and decision-making with
respect to any such complaint. The process followed for such complaints is as follows:

1. After the receipt of the complaint by DEAC, all materials related to the complaint are
forwarded to the Chair of the Executive Committee (unless the complaint is about the
chair). If the complaint is about the Chair, the complaint and all materials are forwarded
to the Vice Chair.

2. After the receipt of the complaint, the Chair or Vice Chair sends a letter to the
complainant acknowledging receipt of the complaint and explaining the process the
DEAC will follow in investigating the complaint. The Chair or Vice Chair also forwards
a copy of the complaint to the person(s) named in the same. The identity of the
complainant(s) may be withheld in the Chair’s or Vice Chair’s sole discretion. The Chair
or Vice Chair may also elect, in their discretion, to send only a summary of the
allegations in the complaint rather than the actual complaint. The person(s) named in the
complaint is asked to respond to the same (or the summary of the same) in writing within
30 days.

3. The Chair or Vice Chair also decides whether any additional information is needed from
the complainant or regarding the subject of the complaint, before the complaint can be
considered. If so, the Chair or Vice Chair requests that DEAC obtain the information
within 30 days. If the requested information is not received within the specified time
frame, the Chair or Vice Chair may determine that there is insufficient information to
pursue the complaint further; any such determination will be communicated to the
complainant. If the requested information is not received from the subject of the
complaint, the matter will be referred to the Board for further action. DEAC employees
may be subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination. DEAC consultants,
contractors and volunteers may, as applicable, have their contracts terminated and/or their
names removed from the pool of potential volunteers retained by DEAC in connection
with the accreditation process. Directors and Commissioners may be subject to
disciplinary measures up to and including removal from office.

4. Within 30 days of receipt of all the information pertaining to the complaint, including the
original complaint and any additional information, provided by the Complainant and/or
the subject(s) of the Complaint and/or otherwise assembled by DEAC staff (such
materials, as they may be supplemented or revised from time to time, the “complaint
file”), the Chair or Vice Chair convenes a conference call of the Executive Committee to
review the complaint.

5. After review of the complaint file the Executive Committee summarizes its findings and
presents them to the full Commission at its next regularly scheduled meeting, unless an
earlier special meeting is requested by the Executive Committee in its sole discretion.
The Board will then consider the complaint file, together with the analysis and
recommendations of the Executive Committee. The Board may at that point reach a final
decision with respect to the resolution of the complaint or may elect to defer that decision
if it believes more information is required in order to reach a fully considered and fair

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 81
 decision. If the Board requires additional information, it will work with DEAC staff to
use good faith efforts to collect such information within 30 days. Both the complainant
and the subject of the Complaint will be kept informed of the Board’s actions.

6. If the Board determines that there has been a violation of DEAC standards, policies, or
code of conduct by a DEAC employee or contractor, director, evaluator or other affiliated
person, the Board will take such disciplinary action as it deems appropriate, up to and
including termination. DEAC consultants, contractors and volunteers may, as applicable,
have their contracts terminated and/or their names removed from the pool of potential
volunteers retained by DEAC in connection with the accreditation process. Directors and
Commissioners may be subject to disciplinary measures up to and including removal
from office. The Board may also refer the complaint to third parties for further action.

7. The Chair or Vice Chair notifies the person named in the complaint of the Board’s
decision within 30 days.

8. The Chair or Vice Chair notifies the complainant of the final disposition of the complaint
within 30 days after such disposition has been determined by the Board.

A record of the complaint file, the Board’s decision, and the notice sent to the complainant
with respect to the same are, kept on file at the DEAC offices in accordance with document
retention policies and procedures.

XXIII. REVIEWING, ADOPTING, AND CIRCULATING CHANGES TO THE ACCREDITATION HANDBOOK

A. The Commission has the power and responsibility to review, establish, and circulate its
standards and procedures for evaluation and accreditation of distance education
institutions.

B. Origin of Accreditation Standards and Procedures: The Commission considers

recommendations from any source and in any manner or form when reviewing its
accreditation standards and procedures. The following is a list of some sources of
recommendations for new or amended accreditation standards and procedures:

1. Commission: The Commission reviews its accreditation standards and procedures

and any comments received at every meeting.

2. DEAC Staff: The DEAC staff make recommendations and suggestions to the
Commission regarding any accreditation standards or procedures that it believes need
to be strengthened.

3. Board Sub-Committee: The Standards Committee, from time to time, makes

recommendations to the Commission to refine and/or revise standards to ensure that
they continue to meet the needs of students and member institutions.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 82
 4. DEAC Evaluators and Subject Specialists: All DEAC evaluators and subject
specialists are surveyed after each review and on-site visit to seek recommendations
for clarifying accreditation standards and improving procedures.

5. State Regulators: DEAC invites a representative from the state regulator’s office
where the institution is located to observe on-site visits and provide feedback on
DEAC accreditation standards and procedures.

6. Government and Nongovernmental Agencies: Input and changes from the U.S.
Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation
(CHEA) inform revisions to DEAC accreditation standards and procedures.

7. Educators, Faculty, and Administrators: Education industry professionals provide

recommendations for revisions to DEAC accreditation standards and improvements
to procedures based on best practices.

8. Consumer Groups: DEAC periodically interacts with consumer protection groups

(e.g., Better Business Bureaus, Chambers of Commerce, etc.) to seek suggestions for
improvement of accreditation standards and procedures.

9. Applicant and Accredited Institutions: Each applicant and member institution is

encouraged to provide thoughtful feedback and suggestions for clarification and
revision of DEAC accreditation standards and procedures for continuous
improvement.

10. Third-Party Review: DEAC periodically retains an independent organization to

review its accreditation standards and procedures and to conduct rigorous validity and
reliability surveys.

11. Students and the General Public: DEAC seeks input and feedback from students
through surveys. Student complaints and correspondence are responded to by DEAC
staff and used during reviews of accreditation standards and procedures.

C. Systematic Program Review: DEAC seeks input and collects data from its communities
of interest, including internal and external constituencies. DEAC uses these data when
evaluating and drafting changes to its accreditation standards and procedures. DEAC
performs a systematic review of its accreditation standards and procedures using
comments, recommendations, and data collected from various sources. Elements of the
systematic review process include the following:

1. Every five years, DEAC engages an independent, third-party organization to survey

accredited institutions, DEAC evaluators (e.g., faculty from appropriately accredited
institutions recognized by the U.S. Department of Education), subject specialists, and
students (e.g., active, graduates, inactive, and withdrawn) on the validity and
reliability of DEAC’s accreditation standards and procedures. These surveys focus on
the adequacy and relevance of the accreditation standards and their effectiveness in

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 83
 enabling DEAC to evaluate the quality of distance education. The third-party
organization evaluates DEAC’s accreditation standards and procedures individually
and as a whole.

2. The DEAC Board Standards Committee collects feedback from member institutions
and other interested constituencies as part of the review process. The committee may
create as special task forces to address the evaluation of the information and
determine whether current accreditation standards or procedures need revision. The
Standards Committee meets twice a year at the DEAC Annual Conference and Fall
Workshop and at such other times as may be requested by DEAC and/or the
Commission.

3. DEAC staff propose revisions to accreditation standards and procedures to ensure

continued compliance with recognition criteria from the U.S. Secretary of Education
and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA).

4. Interested constituencies, institutions, and organizations are continuously encouraged

to submit comments and recommendations for revision of current accreditation
standards and procedures. Comments and recommendations are sent to DEAC’s
executive director.

D. Processes and Procedures for Adoption of Changes to the Accreditation

Handbook: The following process is followed for adopting revisions to DEAC’s
accreditation standards and procedures.

1. All recommendations for revisions to current accreditation standards and

procedures are collected by DEAC staff and submitted to the Standards
SubCommittee for initial review. The Standards SubCommittee proposes revised
language or develops new accreditation standards or procedures based on the
feedback received. Once the Standards SubCommittee reviews the proposed
language, it is forwarded to the Commission for review. The Commission
considers the recommendations and reviews the proposed language and either
approves the changes as proposed or makes revisions and then approves the
revised language.

2. Upon Commission approval of the revised accreditation standards or procedures,

the proposed language is sent to member institutions, the public, and other
stakeholders for comment. Comments are solicited within an established time
frame (usually 30 days). A notice is posted on DEAC’s website to allow the
general public to review and comment on the proposed changes. DEAC
encourages all internal and external communities of interest, including those that
have made their interest known, to comment on any proposed changes.

3. The Commission reviews and carefully considers all comments before making a
final decision. The Commission can adopt accreditation standards and procedures
as proposed, adopt with changes or modifications, defer action until further study

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 84
 and consideration can be had, or reject the proposed changes outright. Once
changes to accreditation standards or procedures are finalized, the revised
standards are published as provided under Section E below. Institutions are
provided a reasonable period in which to comply with the same when appropriate.

4. If exigent circumstances exist that necessitate a material change to DEAC

accreditation standards or procedures to become final and effective immediately,
the Commission publishes the change in final form without regard to the notice
and comment procedures stated in II.6. Interested parties are provided an
opportunity to comment on the change as soon as practicable after publication.
Examples of exigent changes which might require such immediate action include,
but are not limited to: (a) immediate changes to DEAC policies, procedures and
standards required by other accrediting organizations; (b) legal or regulatory
changes with effective dates that do not support the standard comment period; and
(c) external causes (such as pandemics, infrastructure/communication issues, or
domestic/international conflicts).

5. Non-substantive changes to DEAC’s standards, policies and procedures may be

adopted by the Commission without a notice or comment period. However, they
are published by DEAC in accordance with subsection E below. Non-substantive
changes include, by way of example, changes which are intended (i) to clarify
and/or provide greater detail with respect to existing provisions, (ii) to improve
readability, (iii) to conform terminology, and (iv) to update names, addresses and
administrative information.

E. Circulation of Accreditation Standards and Procedures: DEAC circulates the new

or revised accreditation standards or procedures following the processes below:

1. New or revised accreditation standards or procedures are posted on DEAC’s

website and published in DEAC publications that are sent to all internal and
external constituencies.

2. The following DEAC publications are updated to include the new or revised
accreditation standards or procedures.

a. The Accreditation Handbook is made available on the DEAC website. Printed

copies are made available upon request.

b. DEAC updates its online training manuals and courses with new or revised
accreditation standards or procedures.

c. DEAC staff review the new or revised accreditation standards or procedures

with on-site evaluators before each on-site visit.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 85
 PART THREE: ACCREDITATION STANDARDS
DEAC has established twelve accreditation standards against which institutions seeking DEAC
accreditation or renewal of accreditation are evaluated. Because accredited institutions are
expected to maintain compliance with all twelve standards during their accreditation term, the
standards are also used in mid-term monitoring processes.
Taken together, the twelve standards represent a comprehensive and detailed collection of
requirements, focusing first on an institution’s mission and then extending to all material
dimensions of the institution’s operations each of which are guided by and intended to support
the institution’s mission. The standards are intended to be both definitive and aspirational:
definitive, in that each standard sets forth its requirements with precision and transparency; and
aspirational because, as with all educational endeavors, there is always room to improve. That is
why, running thematically through the standards, is the requirement that the institution
continually monitors its performance and looks for opportunities to improve. Finally, and for
avoidance of doubt, the Commission bases its decisions regarding accreditation on DEAC’s
published accreditation standards and does not use as a negative factor, when present, an
institution’s religious mission-based policies, decisions, and practices as these may be reflected
in the institution’s curricula, faculty, facilities, student support services, and recruiting and
admissions policies.

I. INSTITUTIONAL MISSION
INTRODUCTION
An institution’s mission communicates its purpose and solidifies its identity within the
educational community. The mission reflects a commitment to providing quality distance
educational offerings that meet the needs of students and relevant stakeholders. The
institution develops and implements policies and procedures within the context of its
mission, assuring that educational offerings and administrative practices are of sufficient
scope and quality to achieve the mission. In doing so, it also demonstrates compliance with
the DEAC standards. This section identifies three (3) core components of Standard I.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. DESCRIPTION OF THE MISSION

The institution’s mission communicates its purpose and its commitment to providing
quality distance educational offerings appropriate to the level of study offered. The
mission establishes the institution’s identity within the educational community and
guides the development of its educational offerings.

B. REVIEW AND PUBLICATION OF THE MISSION

The institution’s leadership, faculty, staff, administrators, and other stakeholders
regularly review the mission to assure continued institutional quality and viability.
The published mission statement is readily accessible to students, faculty, staff, other
stakeholders, and the public.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 86
 C. INFORMATION ON ACHIEVEMENT OF THE MISSION
The institution identifies key indicators it uses to demonstrate that it is effectively
carrying out its mission. The institution documents the achievement of its mission and
shares appropriate information on this achievement with relevant groups (e.g.,
Advisory Councils, faculty, staff, students, and the public).

IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution’s mission communicates its purpose and commitment to
delivering quality distance educational offerings. The mission defines the institution,
identifies what it does and for whom, and is regularly reviewed by all stakeholders. The
institution measures ongoing achievement of its mission. The mission guides planning for the
future.

II. INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS AND STRATEGIC PLANNING

INTRODUCTION
Two fundamental attributes of institutional sustainability are monitoring effectiveness and
planning for the future. The institution implements a comprehensive effectiveness plan
incorporating feedback loops, which lead to administrative and academic enhancements.
Additionally, an institution plans for future growth and financial stability through focused
activities within the strategic planning process. This section identifies two (2) core
components of Standard II.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS PLANNING

The institution demonstrates a commitment to its educational offerings and
administrative operations through processes that monitor and improve institutional
effectiveness. The institution engages in sound research practices; collects and
analyzes evidence about its effectiveness; and develops action plans that are used to
improve operations, educational offerings, and services.

B. STRATEGIC PLANNING
The institution has a systematic process of planning for the achievement of goals that
support its mission. The institution’s planning process involves all areas of the
institution’s operations (e.g., admissions, academics, technology, etc.) in identifying
strategic initiatives and goals by evaluating external and internal trends as they affect
the future. At a minimum, the strategic plan addresses finances, academics,
technology, admissions, marketing, personnel, and institutional sustainability. The
strategic plan is reviewed and updated annually using established metrics designed to
measure achievement of strategic planning goals and objectives. The plan helps
institutions set priorities, manage resources, and set goals for future performance.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 87
 IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution demonstrates commitment to its educational offerings and
administrative operations by engaging in processes that monitor institutional effectiveness
and strategies for the future. The institution engages in research practices, collects
meaningful evidence, and implements ongoing improvements. The institution involves
relevant stakeholders in the development and achievement of strategic initiatives to attain its
objectives and to assure sustainability.

III. PROGRAM OUTCOMES, CURRICULA, AND MATERIALS

INTRODUCTION
Program learning outcomes reflect academic competencies at the appropriate level and rigor.
They communicate the knowledge and skills students will acquire upon successful
completion of the program. The effective design of program outcomes, curricula, and
supplemental materials results in cohesive educational offerings and in evaluation methods of
student learning that are clearly connected to the stated outcomes. The institution delivers
clear, up-to-date, and well-organized curricula and instructional materials and provides
access to appropriate learning resources. Institutions present evidence that all educational
offerings conform to commonly accepted education practices. This section identifies ten (10)
core components of Standard III.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM OUTCOMES

Program outcomes are clearly defined, simply stated, and indicate the benefits for
students who are reasonably capable of completing the educational offering. Course
learning outcomes are linked to program outcomes as identified by the institution and
are consistent with the curricula offered.

B. APPROPRIATE PROGRAM OUTCOMES

The program outcomes are measurable and reasonably attainable through distance
education. Appropriate program outcomes clearly communicate the knowledge,
skills, and abilities students will obtain upon completion of the educational offering.
Program outcomes reflect the expected level of student achievement that promotes
critical thinking, ethical reasoning, social responsibility, global citizenship, civic
engagement, or lifelong learning, as applicable to the educational offerings.

1. DEGREE PROGRAMS
All required academic or professional activities, such as program outcomes,
course learning outcomes, research projects, supervised clinical practice,
field work, applied research exercises, theses, and dissertations, are clearly stated.

2. Capstone projects, if required, are consistent with academic and professional

standards based on commonly accepted higher education practices and those
of any applicable relevant professional organizations. Capstone project

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 88
 learning outcomes are clearly stated.

3. DOCTORAL DEGREES
The outcomes of doctoral degree programs are advanced, focused, and
scholarly, providing the breadth and depth of learning indicative of advanced
degrees.

a. Professional doctoral degrees prepare scholars to become leaders in their

field of study through the pursuit of and contribution to contemporary
research that is applied, practical, or project-oriented and is focused on the
application of knowledge to a profession.

b. The learning activities of doctoral degree programs include, as

appropriate, seminars, professional meetings, in-residence requirements,
discussions with colleagues, participation in sustained synchronous or
asynchronous online conferences at predetermined points throughout the
program, access to library services, and access to online chat rooms with
fellow students, faculty, and relevant professionals.

c. The professional doctoral degree program requires students to work with a

supervisory dissertation/research project committee that is knowledgeable
in graduate-level study and research methods in the discipline. Doctoral
degree program curricula include the history and development of the field
of study and its foundational theoretical principles.

C. CURRICULA DELIVERY
All curricula and instructional materials are appropriately designed and presented for
distance education. Online materials sufficiently support the curriculum and are
delivered using readily available, reliable technology.

D. COMPREHENSIVE CURRICULA AND INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

Curricula and instructional materials are sufficiently comprehensive for students to
achieve the stated program outcomes. Their organization and content are supported
by reliable research and practice. The organization and presentation of the curricula
and instructional materials reflect sound principles of learning and are grounded in
distance education instructional design principles. The curricula and instructional
materials reflect current knowledge and practice. Curricula and instructional materials
are kept up to date, and reviews are conducted and documented on a periodic basis.
Instructions and suggestions on how to study and how to use the instructional
materials are made available to assist students to learn effectively and efficiently.

1. The institution maintains an Advisory Council for each major group of

programs or major subject matter disciplines it offers. The Advisory Council
includes members not otherwise employed or contracted at the institution,
consisting of practitioners and employers in the field for which the program
prepares students. Advisory Councils

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 89
 a. meet at least annually;
b. provide advice on the current level of skills, knowledge, and abilities
individuals need for entry into the occupation; and
c. provide the institution with recommendations on the adequacy of
educational program outcomes, curricula, and course materials.

2. The institution determines whether courses in a program require any

prerequisites. The institution also determines whether courses are offered in a
prescribed sequence to maximize student achievement of the program outcomes.

3. GENERAL EDUCATION FOR DEGREE GRANTING

General education courses convey broad knowledge and intellectual concepts to
students and develop skills and attitudes that contribute to civic engagement,
academic achievement, and professional attainment. General education courses
address content not associated with a particular field of study. General
education courses encompass written and oral communication; quantitative
principles; natural and physical sciences; social and behavioral sciences; and
humanities and fine arts and are designed to develop essential academic skills
for enhanced and continued learning.

4. ASSOCIATE DEGREE
Associate degrees are awarded in academic or professional subjects for terminal
career or technical programs. Institutions design and offer programs in a way
that appropriately balances distinct types of education and training and includes
a comprehensive curriculum with appropriate coursework to achieve the
program outcomes. Associate degree programs consist of a minimum of 60
semester credit hours or 90 quarter credit hours. General education courses
account for a minimum of 25 percent of the credits required for successful
completion of associate degree programs.

5. BACHELOR’S DEGREE
Bachelor’s degree programs are designed and offered in a way that
appropriately balances distinct types and levels of education and must include a
comprehensive curriculum with appropriate coursework to achieve the program
outcomes. Bachelor’s degree programs consist of a minimum of 120 semester
credit hours or 180 quarter credit hours. General education courses represent a
minimum of 25 percent of the credits required for successful completion of a
bachelor’s degree program.

6. MASTER’S DEGREE
Master’s degree programs are designed and offered in a way that provides for a
distinct level of education and fosters independent learning and an
understanding of research methods appropriate to the academic discipline.
Graduate-level courses are based on appropriate prerequisites, learning
outcomes, and assessments. Institutions establish whether graduate courses are
completed in a prescribed sequence to facilitate student achievement of

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 90
 program outcomes. Master’s degree programs are a minimum of 30 semester
credit hours or 45 quarter credit hours.

7. FIRST PROFESSIONAL DEGREE

First professional degree programs are designed to offer a required academic
credential leading to entry into a specific profession. The graduate degree
program identifies competencies required for successful practice in the
discipline. First professional degree programs require prior undergraduate
preparation appropriate to the degree offered. Graduates of the first
professional degree program demonstrate competencies that enable them to
evaluate theories and engage in research relevant to the field of study.
Demonstrated learning outcomes are comparable to those achieved during a
minimum of 50 semester credit hours, 75 quarter credit hours, or their
equivalent beyond the bachelor’s degree.

8. PROFESSIONAL DOCTORAL DEGREE

Professional doctoral degree programs are designed to offer practice-oriented
content leading to an advanced academic credential. Professional doctoral
degree programs identify and teach competencies that support advancements
in the field of study. Graduates of professional doctoral degree programs
demonstrate the ability to conduct, interpret, and apply the results of
appropriate research. Adequate oversight and advising are provided through
all phases of the doctoral program, including clinical practice or fieldwork
required by the field of study.

a. Unless otherwise specified for a particular field of study

(e.g. nursing, engineering), the program of study requires 60 graduate-
level semester credit hours, 90 graduate-level quarter credit hours, or their
equivalent beyond the master’s degree with a maximum of 15 semester
credit hours or 22.5 quarter credit hours for the dissertation or final
research project. Professional doctoral degree programs are completed in
no fewer than two years and no more than 10 years from the date of initial
enrollment. A first professional degree in the same discipline may reduce
the program requirements when the institution requires a minimum of 90
total graduate semester credit hours or 135 quarter credit hours after the
bachelor’s degree.

b. Professional doctoral degrees require dissertations or capstone projects

involving original contributions to the field of study using applied research
methods. An appropriately credentialed doctoral committee approves
dissertation and capstone project topics. A dissertation or capstone project
manual is provided that includes guidelines on identifying, researching,
writing on, and presenting the selected topic. Dissertations or capstone
projects are appropriately defended by doctoral candidates before a
doctoral committee via distance or in person. Professional doctoral
degrees are awarded upon final approval by a majority of the doctoral

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 91
 committee.

E. CURRICULA DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY

1. Qualified persons competent in distance education instructional design
practices work with experts in subjects or fields to develop the content of all
curricula and prepare instructional materials.

2. The institution describes its model for distance education delivery such as:
correspondence, online, or hybrid.

3. Any contracting with a third party for educational delivery is conducted in

accordance with DEAC Processes and Procedures, Part Two, Section XIX
F.4. and F.5., Changes in Educational Offerings.

F. ACADEMIC UNITS OF MEASUREMENT

The institution documents policies and procedures used to define the chosen
academic unit of measurement. Academic units are measured by either clock hours or
credit hours.

1. CLOCK HOURS
The institution documents its implementation and application of policies and
procedures for determining clock hours awarded for its courses and programs.
A clock hour is one instructional hour. One instructional hour is defined as 50
minutes of instruction in a 60-minute period.

2. CREDIT HOURS
The institution documents its implementation and application of policies and
procedures for determining credit hours awarded for its courses and programs.
The assignment of credit hours must conform to commonly accepted practices
in higher education. A credit hour is defined as an amount of work represented
by intended learning outcomes and verified through evidence of student
achievement in academic activities.

3. CREDIT HOUR DEFINITION

Semester and quarter hours are equivalent to the commonly accepted and
traditionally defined units of academic measurement. Academic degree or
academic credit-bearing distance education courses are measured by the
learning outcomes normally achieved through 45 hours of student work for
one semester credit1 or 30 hours of student work for one quarter credit.2
1
One credit/semester hour is 15 hours of academic engagement and 30 hours of
preparation.
2
One quarter hour credit is 10 hours of academic engagement and 20 hours of
preparation.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 92
 4. DOCUMENTING CREDIT HOURS
The institution demonstrates that each course and program requires the
appropriate amount of work needed for students to achieve the level of
competency defined by institutionally established course/program outcomes.
The institution measures and documents the amount of time it takes the
average student to achieve learning outcomes and specifies the academic
engagement and preparation time.

All student work is documented in the curricula materials and syllabi,

including a reasonable approximation of time required for students to
complete the assignments. Evaluation of student work is identified as a
grading criterion and weighted appropriately in the determination of a final
course grade.

G. EDUCATIONAL MEDIA AND LEARNING RESOURCES

Learning resources for faculty and students are available and appropriate to the level
and scope of program offerings. Program designers, faculty, and instructors
effectively use appropriate teaching aids and learning resources, including
educational media and supplemental instructional aids, when creating programs and
teaching students. The institution provides faculty and students with access to
learning resources, libraries, or resource-related services that are appropriate for the
achievement of program learning outcomes.

1. UNDERGRADUATE DEGREES
Learning resources are systematically and regularly evaluated to assure that
they meet student needs and support the institution’s programs and mission. A
variety of educational materials are selected, acquired, organized, and
maintained to fulfill the institution’s mission and support all educational
offerings. Faculty are involved in the selection of learning resources.

2. GRADUATE DEGREES
In addition to the requirements for undergraduate degrees, graduate students
are provided with access to library and other learning resources that are
sufficient for research at the graduate level. The institution provides and
encourages the use of library services and, if required, research and laboratory
facilities at a distance or through arrangements with local institutions.

H. EXAMINATIONS AND OTHER ASSESSMENTS

Examinations and other assessment techniques provide adequate evidence of the
achievement of stated learning outcomes. The institution establishes and enforces
grading criteria that it uses to evaluate and document student attainment of learning
outcomes.

1. UNDERGRADUATE DEGREES
The institution assesses student achievement through multiple means of
evaluation (e.g., student presentations, group projects, essays, research papers,

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 93
 participation in threaded discussions, supervised practica, or externships).

2. MASTER’S DEGREES
The institution assesses student achievement through multiple means of
evaluation, including a culminating experience required for program
completion (e.g., capstone experience, comprehensive examination, research
project, or master’s thesis).

3. FIRST PROFESSIONAL AND DOCTORAL DEGREES

The institution assesses student achievement through multiple means of
evaluation that includes a doctoral dissertation or final research project as well
as other forms of assessments such as qualifying examinations,
comprehensive examinations, or other assessments that demonstrate student
mastery of the stated program learning outcomes. The institution requires
students to successfully complete all coursework and a doctoral dissertation or
final research project to graduate from the program.

I. STUDENT INTEGRITY AND ACADEMIC HONESTY

The institution publishes clear, specific policies related to student integrity and
academic honesty. The institution affirms that the student who takes an assessment is
the same person who enrolled in the program and that the examination results will
reflect the student’s own knowledge and competence in accordance with stated
learning outcomes.

1. NON-DEGREE PROGRAMS
Institutions meet this requirement by using a secure login and passcode,
administering proctored assessments, or by other means of secure technology.

2. DEGREE PROGRAMS
In addition to the requirements for non-degree programs above, degree-
granting institutions meet this requirement by administering proctored
assessments at intervals throughout the program of study and provide a clear
rationale for placement of the proctored assessments within the program.
Proctors use valid government-issued photo identification or other means to
confirm student identity.

J. INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD

For any final research project, master’s thesis, or dissertation that involves human
research, the institution must require prior formal review and approval for all such
research involving human subjects through an institutional review board (IRB), which
has been designated to approve, monitor, and review all research involving human
subjects. The IRB should ensure that the subjects are not placed at undue risk, that they
have voluntarily agreed to participate, and that they have given appropriate informed
consent. The IRB must meet all federal regulations, and the institution must be able to
demonstrate that it is in compliance, including providing evidence that all IRB
members have had appropriate training. (Title 45 Code of Federal Regulations Part 46)

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 94
 IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution demonstrates a commitment to delivering quality distance
education by implementing curricula that are based on clear and measurable outcomes for
learning and that provide opportunities for all students to acquire the requisite knowledge,
skills, and attitudes. The curriculum is up to date and well organized and adheres to sound
principles of instructional design appropriate to the method of instruction. The institution
documents achievement of program outcomes through assessment methods that are relevant
and appropriate to the level of educational offerings and are prepared by appropriately
qualified academic personnel. The institution supplements curricula and provides students
access to appropriate educational media and learning resources to allow for in-depth study
and research.

IV. EDUCATIONAL AND STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES

INTRODUCTION
An effective institution demonstrates attention and active involvement when addressing
students’ educational needs and goals throughout all phases of an academic program. The
institution demonstrates that proactive procedures are in place to adequately respond to
students’ inquiries, educational needs, and individual differences and encourage program
completion. The institution implements appropriate assessment procedures using published
grading policies and a fair, consistent marking system. It demonstrates that student records
are adequately and securely maintained. The institution provides support services to assist
students, including relevant counseling services and a published complaint policy. The
institution offers comprehensive supplemental services to ensure that students have access to
support for successful program completion. This section identifies ten (10) core components
of Standard IV.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY
The institution uses appropriate and readily accessible technology to optimize
interaction between the institution and the student that effectively supports
instructional and educational services. Students, faculty, and involved practitioners
receive training and support for the technology used to deliver the educational
offerings.

B. STUDENT INQUIRIES AND SUBMISSIONS

The institution publishes all available methods students can use to submit inquiries
and assignments. The institution responds promptly and thoroughly to all student
inquiries using all these channels.

C. INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
Academic advising and instructional support are provided to assist students in
achieving institutional and program requirements, program outcomes, course learning

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 95
 outcomes, and educational goals consistent with best educational practices and as
required by applicable federal and state laws.

D. ENCOURAGEMENT OF STUDENTS
The institution’s policies and procedures optimize interaction between the institution
and students. The interaction proactively promotes student completion and success.

E. SATISFACTORY ACADEMIC PROGRESS

The institution implements and consistently applies a satisfactory academic progress
policy and discloses this policy to students. Standards for measuring satisfactory
academic progress include qualitative and quantitative standards used for evaluation
of student progress. The institution takes appropriate action if students fail to meet the
institution’s minimum standards of progress. Students are informed of their academic
progress and standing in the program at regular intervals throughout their enrollment.

F. GRADING POLICIES
Student academic performance is measured using published grading policies that
include prompt return of accurately, fairly, and consistently graded assessments that
are supervised by a qualified instructor or faculty member. The institution publishes
its assignment marking system, course extension policy, and information on issuance
and completion of incomplete grades and applies them with fairness and consistency.

G. STUDENT RECORDS
Accurate student records are securely and confidentially maintained. Policies and
procedures for keeping records on students’ academic progress are in accordance with
applicable federal and state laws and professional requirements. Transcripts are
readily accessible and are maintained permanently in either print or digital form.

H. CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVACY

The institution’s policies protect student confidentiality and privacy as required by
applicable federal and state laws.

I. STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES

The institution provides support services designed for the students enrolled, such as
financial aid guidance, advising services, employment assistance, and/or alumni
services. Appropriate academic support services are readily available. Any career
services and/or alumni services are offered as published in the institution’s materials.

J. STUDENT COMPLAINTS
The institution has policies and procedures for receiving, responding to, and
addressing student complaints. The policies and procedures should embody the
principles of fairness, responsiveness, respect, due process and proportionality.

1. INSTITUTIONAL COMPLAINTS

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 96
 DEAC requires institutions to have written complaint policies and procedures
for the purposes of receiving, responding to, addressing, and resolving
complaints made by students, faculty, administrators, or any party, including
one who has good reason to believe that an institution is not in compliance
with DEAC accreditation standards.

2. At a minimum, the institution’s policy instructs students how to file a

complaint or grievance and the maximum time for resolution. The institution’s
complaint policy and procedures are available to all students. The institution
defines what it reasonably considers to be a student complaint.

3. The institution reviews in a timely, fair, and equitable manner any complaint it
receives from students. When the complaint concerns a faculty member or
administrator, the institution may not complete its review and make a final
decision regarding a complaint unless, and in accordance with its published
procedures, it ensures that the faculty member or administrator has sufficient
opportunity to provide a response to the complaint. The institution takes any
follow-up action, including enforcement action if necessary, based on the
results of its review.

4. The institution’s complaint policy states how complaints can be filed with
state agencies and its accrediting organization.

5. The institution will retain the complete files for all complaints which may be
filed against the institution, its faculty, staff, students or other associated
parties for the longer of five years from the filing of the complaint or the
completion of the institution’s next cycle of evaluation for reaccreditation.

IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution places emphasis on supporting the instructional needs of its
students, including documenting how instructional and non-instructional staff regularly
engage to monitor student progress through and completion of educational offerings.
Appropriately qualified instructors or faculty members assure that prompt responses to
questions and submissions are returned to students. The institution anticipates the needs of
individual students and provides appropriate guidance when accommodations are necessary.
Institutions optimize interaction with students and incorporate those interactions into the
continuous improvement of instructional materials and educational support services.
Institutions maintain accurate, secure, and readily accessible records that are available to
students. Institutional learning assessment procedures are guided by clearly published
grading policies that encourage prompt return of all assignments and assessments.
Supplemental student support services relevant to the needs of the student population are
available where appropriate. A clearly articulated process to address student complaints is in
place which ensures that students will feel comfortable expressing complaints and their
complaints will be fairly and timely addressed and resolved; the institution is also expected to
utilize data gathered from this process to improve its operations.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 97
V. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND SATISFACTION

INTRODUCTION
The institution implements a comprehensive assessment program, to monitor student
satisfaction and achievement of learning outcomes. The institution’s written outcomes
assessment plan documents, monitors, and analyzes data collected to improve learning
outcomes and to inform institutional effectiveness activities. This section identifies three (3)
core components of Standard V.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
The institution evaluates student achievement using indicators that it determines are
appropriate relative to its mission and educational offerings. The institution evaluates
student achievement by collecting data from outcomes assessment activities using
direct and indirect measures. The institution maintains systematic and ongoing
processes for assessing student learning and achievement, analyzes data, and
documents that the results meet both internal and external benchmarks, including
those comparable to courses or programs offered at peer DEAC-accredited
institutions. The institution demonstrates and documents how the evaluation of
student achievement drives quality improvement of educational offerings and support
services.

B. STUDENT SATISFACTION
The institution systematically seeks student and alumni opinions as one basis for
evaluating and improving curricula, instructional materials, method of delivery, and
student services. The institution regularly collects evidence that students are satisfied
with the administrative, educational, and support services provided.

C. PERFORMANCE DISCLOSURES
The institution routinely discloses on its website reliable, current, and accurate
information on its performance, including student achievement, as determined by the
institution.

IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution demonstrates a commitment to its students and educational
offerings by implementing a comprehensive assessment program based on clearly defined,
evidence-based, and measurable program and course learning outcomes. The assessment
program is used to track student satisfaction, persistence, and the achievement of outcomes in
order to evaluate the effectiveness of the curricula and instruction offered by the institution
and to improve student learning. The data received from these evaluations provide the
institution with meaningful, timely, and accurate qualitative and quantitative information that
is used by faculty, administrators, and various stakeholders to determine institutional
effectiveness and to evaluate results of improvement efforts.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 98
VI. ACADEMIC LEADERSHIP AND FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS
INTRODUCTION
The institution demonstrates effective leadership and a shared purpose through qualified and
experienced administrators, faculty, and staff, who are responsible for academic operations.
Institutions demonstrate that qualified individuals are serving in all relevant academic roles
and contributing to the educational process. The chief academic officer and/or education
director is appropriately qualified by education and experience to oversee administrative
responsibilities for all educational offerings. The institution demonstrates that the appropriate
number of instructors/faculty are employed and qualified by education and experience to
achieve educational objectives and to provide individualized instructional service to students
as needed. The institution encourages and regularly monitors continued professional
development for all administrators, department heads, instructors/faculty, and staff. The
institution documents procedures for hiring qualified individuals. It demonstrates
commitment and collaboration among administrators, faculty, and staff to provide quality
distance education programs for continued growth. This section identifies four (4) core
components of Standard VI.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. ACADEMIC LEADERSHIP
The institution demonstrates appropriate academic leadership capacity and
infrastructure to support the effective distance education delivery of educational
offerings. Academic leaders possess the academic credentials, background,
knowledge, ethics, and experience necessary to guide the instructional activities of
the institution.

B. CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICER (CAO) OR EDUCATION DIRECTOR

The institution designates a chief academic officer, education director, or other
similar oversight position. This individual is responsible for overall administration of
the educational program(s); for the educational, editorial, and research activities
within departmental subject fields; and for faculty/instructors. The individual also
informs marketing decisions.

Within the context of the institution’s mission:

1. The CAO or education director has appropriate academic administrative

experience and competence necessary to lead and manage educational
offerings in a distance education environment.

2. The CAO or education director possesses academic credentials that are

appropriate for the leadership, supervision, and oversight of faculty,
curriculum design, and student achievement expectations.

3. DOCTORAL DEGREES

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 99
 The institution appoints a director for doctoral degree programs. The director
possesses previous higher education administrative capacity and distance
learning knowledge to lead doctoral programs. The director possesses the
appropriate terminal degree earned from an appropriately accredited
institution in a subject area relevant to the degree program being offered.

4. DISSERTATION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE

A doctoral committee of at least three faculty members is assigned for each
student. Doctoral committee members possess appropriate credentials,
scholarship, experience, and practice in the field of study. At least one
member of the doctoral committee is a member of the awarding institution’s
faculty. At least two members of the doctoral committee have earned doctoral
degrees from appropriately accredited institutions other than from the
awarding institution. All committee members are qualified in the subject area
of the dissertation or research project topic. The institution has final approval
for students who nominate faculty to the doctoral committee.

C. INSTRUCTORS, FACULTY, AND STAFF

Faculty/instructors are qualified and appropriately credentialed to teach the subject at
the assigned level. The institution employs a sufficient number of qualified
faculty/instructors to provide individualized instructional service to each student. The
institution maintains faculty/instructor résumés, official transcripts, and copies of
applicable licenses or credentials on file. Faculty/instructors are carefully screened for
appointment and are properly and continuously trained on institution policies, learner
needs, instructional approaches and techniques, and the use of instructional
technology. The institution regularly evaluates faculty and administrator performance
using clear, consistent procedures. The institution assures that faculty are
appropriately involved and engaged in the curricular and instructional aspects of the
educational offerings. Faculty are assigned responsibilities based on their degree
qualifications and/or area(s) of expertise.

1. HIGH SCHOOL
The institution provides evidence that all faculty/instructors are qualified and
appropriately credentialed to teach the subject and level within the high school
program offered.

2. NON-DEGREE
Instructors teaching technically- or practice-oriented courses have practical
experience in the field and possess current licenses and/or certifications, as
applicable.

3. OCCUPATIONAL/TECHNICAL ASSOCIATE DEGREE

Faculty possess earned credentials awarded by appropriately accredited
institutions and/or have practical experience in the field and possess current
licenses and/or certifications if applicable. The institution must demonstrate
the academic preparation and practical experience of each faculty member

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 100
 consistent with accepted postsecondary education practices.

4. UNDERGRADUATE DEGREES
Faculty teaching undergraduate degree program courses possess, at a
minimum, a degree at least one level above that of the program they are
teaching and demonstrate expertise in the subject field of the discipline.
Faculty teaching general education courses at the undergraduate level,
including occupational/technical associate degrees, must possess a master’s
degree in the assigned general education subject field or have a master’s
degree and 18 semester credit hours in the general education subject field.

5. MASTER’S DEGREES
Faculty teaching graduate-level courses in a master’s degree program must
possess, at a minimum, a doctoral/terminal degree earned at an appropriately
accredited institution in the subject field of the discipline and demonstrate
familiarity with practical applications of the field.

6. FACULTY QUALIFICATION EQUIVALENCY

In limited and exceptional cases, institutions may demonstrate that faculty are
qualified to teach at the undergraduate and master’s levels through faculty
qualification equivalency. Such equivalency is demonstrated by evidence of
substantial breadth and depth of experiences and knowledge that are relevant
to the discipline in which the faculty member is teaching. An institution that
intends to substitute faculty qualification equivalency for the degree
qualifications set forth in Standards VI.C.4 and VI.C.5 must have:

a. well-defined policies, procedures and documentation that demonstrate

how experience and knowledge are sufficient to determine that the
faculty member has the expertise necessary to teach students in that
discipline; and
b. procedures that ensure that adequate oversight of teaching and learning
is provided by individuals who possess degree qualifications in
accordance with Standards VI.C.4 and VI.C.5.

7. FIRST PROFESSIONAL DEGREES

All teaching faculty and involved practitioners possess a first professional or
higher degree earned at an appropriately accredited institution in a related
subject field and possess specialized knowledge and skills in the subject area,
consistent with educational practices of other similar programs.

8. PROFESSIONAL DOCTORAL DEGREES

All teaching faculty possess terminal degrees (e.g., professional doctoral
degree or Ph.D.) earned at an appropriately accredited institution in a related
subject field. Prior to enrolling students, the institution has in place a
dedicated dean, director, or other academic officer with credentials

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 101
 appropriate to the degree(s) being offered.

D. PROFESSIONAL GROWTH
The institution demonstrates a commitment to faculty and staff professional
development. The institution encourages faculty and staff to become members of
professional organizations, to review and apply relevant research, to pursue
continuing education or training in their respective fields, and to enhance their skills
in developing and using electronically delivered, online, or other forms of distance
study. The institution provides faculty and administrators with access to a collection
of professional educational materials to keep abreast of current trends, developments,
techniques, research, and experimentation.

IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution has policies and procedures for delineating the roles and
responsibilities for academic leadership and faculty for the short- and long-term stability of
academic leadership. The institution employs appropriately qualified academic personnel to
oversee the delivery of educational offerings. Academic officers and department heads are
responsible for the accuracy of statements made regarding all academic matters. Faculty are
sufficient in number and appropriately credentialed to guide enrolled students through all
phases of the learning process. The institution maintains timely and accurate records of the
qualifications of all academic personnel, including documentation of initial and ongoing
professional development. The institution documents the success of academic personnel
through clear, consistent procedures to evaluate performance.

VII. ADVERTISING, PROMOTIONAL LITERATURE, AND RECRUITMENT PERSONNEL

INTRODUCTION
All of the institution’s advertising and promotion is current and ethical and accurately
presents information that allows prospective students to make informed decisions without
undue pressure. The institution’s recruitment efforts focus on those prospective students who
are likely to be successful and meet their academic goals through the educational offerings of
the institution. Any institutional personnel who engage in activities to attract or enroll
students are considered to be involved in recruitment. This section identifies three (3) core
components of Standard VII.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION

The institution conforms to ethical practices in all advertising and promotion to
prospective students. All advertisements, website content, and promotional literature
are truthful, accurate, clear, and readily accessible to the public; proactively states
that programs are offered via distance education; and appropriately discloses
occupational opportunities as applicable. Catalogs, enrollment agreements, manuals,
and websites list the institution’s full name and physical address. At a minimum, all
print advertisements and promotional literature include the institution’s city, state,

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 102
 and website home page URL. The website home page URL, in accordance with
DEAC's Website Disclosures Checklist, provides the institution’s physical address.
All web-based advertisements provide a link to the institution’s website home page
URL. All institutional social media account profiles provide a link to the institution’s
website home page URL. The institution complies with the DEAC’s Catalog
Disclosures Checklist and DEAC’s Website Disclosures Checklist.

1. All advertisements and promotional materials accurately reflect the programs

and services offered by the institution. The word “guarantee” is never used in
advertisements. Under limited and exceptional circumstances, institutions may
use the word “free” when it is appropriate to the mission and purpose of the
institution.

a. IN-RESIDENCE PROGRAM COMPONENT

All required in-residence components and additional associated costs
are disclosed on the institution’s websites, advertisements, and
promotional materials.

2. The institution’s website testimonials and endorsements are truthful and less
than four years old. The institution maintains signed student consent forms for
each published testimonial. The institution’s website discloses all program
requirements, course descriptions, tuition and related costs, program
schedules, method of delivery, and its catalog prior to the collection of any
personal student contact information. The institution does not use other
institutions as triggers for its own sponsored links on Internet search engines.

3. The institution discloses in its catalog, website, and enrollment agreements

that the acceptance of earned transfer credits is determined by the receiving
institution.

4. The institution adheres to applicable catalog, website, and enrollment

agreement disclosures checklists, based on educational offerings. The
institution publishes student consumer information as required by federal and
state statutes and regulations.

5. Any incentives offered to prospective and current students to enroll must be

limited in nature to institution-branded items and in no event may such items
exceed an aggregate value of $100 annually with respect to any individual.

6. The institution permanently archives its catalogs.

B. INSTITUTION AND COURSE ACCREDITED-STATUS RECOGNITION

The institution accurately reflects its accredited status and uses the official DEAC
accreditation logo and/or statement of accreditation when publishing its accreditation
status in advertisements and promotional materials on its website and in social media.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 103
 DEAC’s name, address, telephone number, and web address are published in the
institution’s catalog.
1. The institution publishes a statement of accreditation only as follows:

Accredited by the Distance Education Accrediting Commission

DEAC Accredited

2. The institution refers to DEAC’s recognition by the U.S. Department of

Education only as follows: “The Distance Education Accrediting Commission
is listed by the U.S. Department of Education as a recognized accrediting
agency.”

3. The institution refers to DEAC’s recognition by the Council for Higher

Education Accreditation (CHEA) only as follows: “The Distance Education
Accrediting Commission is recognized by the Council for Higher Education
Accreditation (CHEA).”

4. The accredited institution publicly corrects any misleading or inaccurate

information it releases on its accreditation status, contents of its on-site team
reports from accreditation-related visits, and/or actions taken by the Distance
Education Accrediting Commission with respect to the institution.

5. All courses and programs of the institution are approved by DEAC before the
institution advertises them or enrolls students in them. The institution uses the
term “College” or “University” in its name only if it offers academic degree
programs.

C. STUDENT RECRUITMENT
The institution demonstrates that ethical processes and procedures are followed
throughout the recruitment of prospective students by any individual who is
authorized by the institution to participate in the enrollment process with prospective
students. Minimum ethical practices and procedures are identified below.

1. The institution takes full responsibility for the actions, statements, and
conduct of its authorized recruitment personnel. The institution maintains
appropriate records, licensures, registrations, signed employment contracts,
and signed DEAC Code of Ethics, as applicable for all recruitment personnel.
The institution demonstrates it adequately trains its recruitment personnel and
provides them with accurate information concerning employment and
remuneration. All authorized recruitment personnel are provided with
appropriate materials covering applicable procedures, policies, and
presentations. The institution demonstrates that it routinely monitors its
recruitment personnel or independent organizations that provide prospective
applicant names to assure that they are in compliance with all state, federal,

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 104
 and DEAC recruitment practices.

2. All personnel involved in student recruitment, including telemarketing staff,

conform to applicable federal, state, and international laws. Personnel
involved in student recruitment may not be given and may not use any title
that indicates special qualifications for career guidance, advising, or
registration, nor may they publish advertisements without written
authorization from the institution.

3. If an institution offers students nominal gifts for referring prospective students

to the institution who ultimately enroll in the institution, such gifts must be
limited in nature to institution-branded items and in no event may exceed an
aggregate value of $100 annually with respect to any individual.

IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution adheres to high ethical standards throughout all advertising
and recruitment practices. The institution ensures that students are not subjected to undue
pressure to enroll or make financial commitments at any time during the recruitment process.
Students are provided with and have access to accurate and current information to make
appropriate educational decisions that meet their academic goals. The institution
appropriately represents its mission, educational offerings, and accreditation through accurate
and consistent publications.

VIII. ADMISSION PRACTICES AND ENROLLMENT AGREEMENTS

INTRODUCTION
The institution is responsible for establishing admissions criteria requiring documentation
that applicants possess the ability to be successful in a distance education environment.
Admissions criteria provide the institution an initial indicator of an applicant’s ability to
perform the level of work required by the educational offerings. An institution’s admissions
criteria reflect its mission, values, and student population. All admission practices and
enrollment agreements meet established standards and ethically disclose all parties’
obligations. This section identifies seven (7) core components of Standard VIII.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. ADMISSIONS DISCLOSURES
Admissions policies and procedures are designed to assure that the institution enrolls
only those students who are reasonably capable of successfully completing and
benefiting from the educational offering.

1. The institution informs each applicant, prior to admission, of the admissions

criteria, the nature of the education provided, and the demands of the
educational offerings. Prior to completing the enrollment process, the
institution requires students to affirm access to the catalog and other

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 105
 institutional documents disclosing the rights, responsibilities, and obligations
of both the student and the institution.

2. The institution admits students regardless of race, color, national origin,

disability, sex, or age. Institutions reasonably accommodate applicants and
students with disabilities to the extent required by applicable laws.

3. Official transcripts, if required for admission, are received within one

enrollment period not to exceed 12 semester credit hours, or the student is
withdrawn from the program.

B. STUDENT IDENTITY VERIFICATION

Student identity verification is initiated during the admissions process to verify that
the admitted student who participates in and completes coursework and assessments
is the same student who is awarded credit.

C. COMPULSORY AGE STUDENTS

An institution enrolling students under the compulsory school age obtains permission
from responsible parties to assure that the pursuit of the educational offerings is not
detrimental to any compulsory schooling.

D. ADMISSIONS CRITERIA
The institution’s admissions criteria align with its mission and student population
served. The institution establishes qualifications that an applicant must possess prior
to enrollment in order to successfully complete the stated educational offerings. The
institution consistently and fairly applies its admission requirements. If an institution
enrolls a student who does not meet the admissions criteria, the institution documents
the reason(s) for the exception to the admissions criteria.

1. Transcripts not in English are evaluated by an appropriate third party and

translated into English or evaluated by a trained transcript evaluator fluent in
the language on the transcript. Evaluators possess expertise in the educational
practices of the country of origin and include an English translation of the
review.

2. The institution’s admissions criteria disclose procedures for verifying

appropriate language proficiencies. The institution verifies English language
proficiency for applicants whose native language is not English and who have
not earned a degree from an appropriately accredited institution where English
is the principal language of instruction. Verification procedures align with
DEAC’s guidance on English Language Proficiency Assessment.

3. NON-DEGREE PROGRAMS
As appropriate for the students served and educational programs offered, the
institution obtains official documentation that applicants possess a high school
diploma or its recognized equivalent at the time of admission (e.g., high

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 106
 school diploma, general educational development tests [GED], or self-
certification statement).

Institutions that implement self-certification procedures must:

obtain a signed statement from the applicant attesting to a high school

diploma or its recognized equivalent;
require applicants to provide the institution name, city, state, and year
of graduation on the self-certification statement;
develop and follow procedures to evaluate the validity of high school
completion, or its equivalent, if the institution has reason to believe
that the documentation was not obtained from an entity that provides
secondary school education (e.g., general educational development
tests or GED); and
document that such practices are necessary to be consistent with the
institution’s mission.

4. UNDERGRADUATE DEGREES
The institution obtains official documentation that applicants possess a high
school diploma or its recognized equivalent at the time of admission (e.g.,
high school diploma or general educational development tests [GED]).
Institutions may implement self-certification in accordance with VIII(D)(3).

5. MASTER’S DEGREES
At the time of admission, the institution obtains official documentation that
applicants possess a bachelor’s degree earned from an appropriately
accredited institution.

6. FIRST PROFESSIONAL DEGREES

At the time of admission, the institution obtains documentation that applicants
possess a bachelor’s or master’s degree earned from an appropriately
accredited institution.

7. PROFESSIONAL DOCTORAL DEGREES

At the time of admission, the institution obtains documentation that applicants
possess a bachelor’s or master’s degree earned from an appropriately
accredited institution and relevant academic experience. At a minimum, the
institution verifies that applicants have completed 30 graduate-level credit
hours prior to admission.

E. ADMISSION ACCEPTANCE AND DENIAL

The institution informs applicants that they have been accepted for admission. The
institution communicates with the applicant and documents the basis for any denial of
admission.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 107
F. TRANSFER CREDITS AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING
The institution implements a fair and equitable transfer credit policy that is published
in the catalog. The steps for requesting transfer credit are clear and disclose the
documentation required for review. Students are able to appeal transfer credit
decisions using published procedures. Transfer credit requests are not denied based
solely on the source of accreditation of the credit-granting institution.

Credit awarded for experiential or equivalent learning, including challenge and test-
out credits, cannot exceed 25 percent of the credits required for an undergraduate
degree. Institutions maintain official documentation of the bases for decisions to
award credit for experiential or equivalent learning.

An institution seeking to offer credit for prior learning assessment publishes and
follows evaluation standards consistent with CAEL’s Ten Standards for Assessing
Learning. Prior learning assessment is performed by qualified individuals with
experience in the evaluation of prior learning.

In instances where a student seeks to transfer more than the maximum allowable
percentage of required credit hours specified in the relevant degree category listed in
subsection F.2. through F.5. below, the institution must conduct a comprehensive
assessment of the student’s credits earned and document how the credits align with its
program outcomes. In such cases, transfer credit allowances may not exceed the
lesser of any applicable state requirements or 90 percent of the credits required for
undergraduate degrees, 75 percent of the credits required for master's degrees or first
professional degrees, or 40 percent of the credits required for professional doctoral
degrees.

1. HIGH SCHOOL
The institution may award a maximum of 75 percent of the credits required
for a high school program.

2. UNDERGRADUATE DEGREES
The institution may award a maximum of 75 percent of the credits required
for a degree program, or a combination of transfer credit and experiential or
equivalent credit (including challenge/test-out credits). Courses accepted for
transfer credit are relevant to the program of study and equivalent in both
content and degree level. Credit awarded for experiential or equivalent
learning cannot exceed 25 percent of the credits required for a degree.

3. MASTER’S DEGREES
The institution may award a maximum of 50 percent of the credits required
for a master’s degree program through transfer credit. Courses accepted for
transfer credit are relevant to the program of study and equivalent in both
content and degree level. Credit awarded for experiential or equivalent
learning cannot exceed 25 percent of the credits required for a master’s

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 108
 degree.

4. FIRST PROFESSIONAL DEGREES

The institution may award a maximum of 50 percent of the credits required
for a first professional degree program through transfer credit. Courses
accepted for transfer credit are relevant to the program of study and equivalent
in both content and degree level.

5. PROFESSIONAL DOCTORAL DEGREES

The institution may award a maximum of 15 percent of the credits required
for a professional doctoral degree program (or nine semester credit hours for a
60 semester credit hour degree program) through transfer credit. Courses
accepted for transfer credit are relevant to the program of study and equivalent
in both content and degree level.

G. ENROLLMENT AGREEMENTS
The institution’s enrollment agreements/documents clearly identify the educational
offering and assure that each applicant is fully informed of the rights, responsibilities,
and obligations of both the student and the institution prior to applicant signature. The
institution complies with the DEAC Enrollment Agreements Disclosures Checklist.

1. The institution requires that, prior to accepting the enrollment agreement,

students affirm and accept the tuition refund policy and the rights,
responsibilities, and obligations of both the student and the institution. The
terms of the tuition refund policy are published in the institution’s enrollment
agreement, catalog, and website.

2. An enrollment agreement is not binding until it has been submitted by the

student and accepted by the institution. A copy of the accepted enrollment
agreement is made available to the student within 10 days of acceptance and
maintained as a part of the student’s record.

3. The institution complies with all applicable Truth in Lending Act (TILA)
requirements, including those under Regulation Z, and state requirements for
retail installment agreements.

4. All required state and Truth in Lending Act disclosures are included in the
enrollment agreement. Requirements for type size, notice to buyer, and
computation examples, as applicable, are observed.

5. If there is a separate payment contract, the contract is incorporated by

reference in the enrollment agreement.

IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution demonstrates a commitment to ethical enrollment
practices through fair and transparent admission and enrollment policies. The institution

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 109
 implements appropriate procedures to assure that enrolled students possess the capacity
to successfully complete and benefit from the educational offering. The institution
discloses all admission, tuition, and refund information and makes every effort to ensure
that students fully understand the obligations of both the institution and the student. The
institution’s enrollment agreements are available for students to review, and they provide
the scope and nature of the educational offerings.

IX. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES, CANCELLATIONS, AND REFUND POLICIES

INTRODUCTION
The institution establishes fair and equitable tuition, cancellation, refund, and collection
policies and procedures. Information about tuition costs and instructional fees, including
textbooks, is readily accessible to students. Tuition and refund policies are disclosed on all
enrollment agreements. Collection procedures are conducted ethically. The institution’s
tuition, refund, and collection policies are administered consistently and fairly. This section
identifies five (5) core components of Standard IX.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES
All costs relative to the education provided by the institution are disclosed to the
prospective student [in an enrollment agreement or similar contractual document]
before enrollment. Costs must include tuition, educational services, textbooks, and
instructional materials; any specific fees associated with enrollment, such as
application and registration fees; and fees for required services such as student
authentication, proctoring, technology access, and library services.

1. The costs for optional services, such as expedited shipment of materials,

experiential portfolio assessment, or other special services, such as
dissertation binding, are clearly disclosed to prospective students as not
subject to refund after the five (5)-calendar-day student-right-to-cancel
enrollment.

2. The institution’s disclosure of its refund policy must include a sample refund
calculation that describes the calculation methodology using clear and
conspicuous language. Student acknowledgement of the refund policy is
obtained and documented in the enrollment agreement or similar contractual
document prior to enrollment.

B. CANCELLATIONS

1. Institutions must maintain, publish, and apply fair and equitable cancellation
and withdrawal policies. A student’s notification of cancellation may be
conveyed to the institution in any manner the institution deems appropriate so
long as the method or methods chosen

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 110
 a. are in compliance with applicable federal and state requirements and
b. do not create unreasonably difficult requirements for the student to
satisfy.
Institutions must designate the manner in which students may submit
cancellation or withdrawal notification and the individual, office, or offices to
whom students may submit notice of official cancellation or withdrawal.

2. A student has five (5) calendar days after signing an enrollment agreement or
similar contractual document to cancel enrollment and receive a full refund of
all monies paid to the institution.

3. A student requesting cancellation more than five calendar days after signing
an enrollment agreement, but prior to beginning a course or program, is
entitled to a refund of all monies paid minus:

an application/transfer credit evaluation fee of up to $75;

a one-time registration fee per program of no more than 20 percent of
the tuition and not to exceed more than $200; and
library service fees, if provided by a third-party service (e.g., LIRN,
Westlaw, ProQuest, EBSCO).

4. Upon cancellation, a student whose costs of education are paid in full, but
who is not eligible for a refund, is entitled to receive all materials, including
kits and equipment.

5. If promissory notes or enrollment agreements are sold to third parties, the

institution ensures that it and any third parties comply with DEAC
cancellation policies.

C. REFUNDS
Each institution must have and implement a fair and equitable refund policy in
compliance with state requirements or, in the absence of such requirements, in
accordance with DEAC’s refund policy standards below and disclosed in the
enrollment agreement or similar contractual document.

Any money due a student must be refunded within 30 days of a cancellation request,
regardless of whether materials have been returned.

1. FLEXIBLE TIME SCHEDULE REFUND POLICY

An institution that implements the flexible time schedule refund policy must
clearly disclose the curriculum benchmarks in terms of assignments submitted
for grading that indicate completion at 10 percent, 25 percent, and 50 percent
intervals.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 111
 When a student cancels after completing at least one lesson assignment but
less than 50 percent of the graded assignments, the institution may retain the
application fee and one-time registration fee of no more than 20 percent of the
tuition (not to exceed $200) and library service fees, plus a percentage of
tuition paid by the student in accordance with the following schedule:

Percentage Completed by the Percentage of Tuition Returned Percentage of Tuition

Student to the Student Minus the Retained by the
Application and/or Registration Institution
Fee
Up to 10 % 90% 10%
>10% - 25% 75% 25%
>25% - 50% 50% 50%
>50% - 100% 0% 100%

2. TIME-BASED TERM REFUND POLICY

A time-based term lasts no more than 16 weeks.

A time-based term refund policy may be applied to any course, program, or

degree. Institutions that utilize the Time-Based Term Refund Policy must
refund 100 percent of the tuition for any course never started. Institutions that
implement the Time-Based Term Refund Policy must clearly disclose the
time-based refund schedule on the enrollment agreement.

When enrolling students in an academic program of study comprised of two or

more courses that award semester credit hours, institutions must treat each
course separately for the purposes of calculating the appropriate amount of
tuition refund owed to the student.

When a student cancels enrollment, the institution may retain the application
fee and a one-time registration fee of no more than 20 percent of the tuition
(not to exceed $200) and library service fees, plus a percentage of tuition paid
by the student in accordance with the following refund schedule:

Length of Term Percentage of Tuition Returned to the

Student Minus the Application and/or
Registration Fee AFTER
1-6 weeks 1st week 70%
nd
2 week 40%
3rd week 20%
th
4 week 0%
st
7-10 weeks 1 week 80%
2nd week 60%
rd
3 week 40%
4th week 20%
th
5 week 0%

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 112
 11-16 weeks 1st week 80%
2nd week 70%
3rd week 60%
4th week 50%
5th week 40%
6th week 30%
7th week 20%
8th week 10%
9th week 0%

3. REFUND POLICY FOR IN-RESIDENCE COURSES/PROGRAMS

For a course/program that includes mandatory in-residence training, the costs
for the distance study portion and the costs for the in-residence portion must
be separately stated in the enrollment agreement.

The distance study portion of the combination course/program must use the
refund policy stated in Section IX(C)(1) or Section IX(C)(2) above. If the
mandatory in-residence portion of the course/program is more than six weeks,
the institution may use the time-based refund policy in Section IX(C)(2). If
the in-residence portion is less than six weeks, the institution may use the
flexible time schedule refund policy in IX(C)(1).

If a student requests cancellation after attending the first in-residence class

session, the institution may retain the application fee and a one-time
registration fee of no more than 20 percent of the tuition, not to exceed $200,
and library service fees, plus a percentage of tuition paid by the student in
accordance with the following refund schedule:

Percentage Completed by the Percentage of Tuition Returned to Percentage of Tuition

Student the Student Minus the Application Retained by the
and/or Registration Fee Institution
Up to 10% 90% 10%
>10 - 25% 75% 25%
>25 - 50% 50% 50%
>50 - 100 % 0% 100%

Courses with optional in-residence training, seminars, and other training

sessions are subject to the refund policy above.

D. DISCOUNTS
Discounted costs are permitted for well-defined groups for specific and bona fide
purposes.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 113
 Discounted costs must indicate the actual reduction in the costs that would otherwise
be charged by the institution. Institutions that offer discounts must demonstrate that
students are enrolled in non-discounted courses or programs for a reasonably
substantial period of time during each calendar year. An institution offering discounts
must calculate refunds based on discounted costs.

An institution that offers discounts must demonstrate that:

All discounts or special offers identify the specific costs for a course or
program.

The presentation of discounts and special offers complies with DEAC’s

advertising and promotion standards.

All discounts (excluding those offered to well-defined groups) or special

offers designate a specific expiration date and do not extend beyond the
expiration date.

E. COLLECTIONS
Collection procedures used by the institution or third parties reflect sound and ethical
business practices. Tuition collection practices and procedures are fair, encourage
students’ progress, and seek to retain their good will. Collection practices consider the
rights and interests of the students and the institution.

IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution discloses its tuition, cancellation, refund, and collection
policies and procedures prior to student enrollment. All cancellations and refunds are
processed promptly upon notification by the student in any manner. The institution
maintains student good will throughout the collections process and assures that students
are aware of the responsibilities and obligations of both the institution and the student.

X. INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE

INTRODUCTION
The governance structure of the institution provides sufficient administrative oversight,
capability, and stability in the efficient and effective use of institutional resources. The
institution demonstrates adequate management, administrative capacity, and succession and
business continuity planning to provide assurances it can accomplish its mission in a manner
consistent with its values while fulfilling its obligations to students. This section identifies
three (3) core components of Standard X.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. OWNERS, GOVERNING BOARD MEMBERS, OFFICIALS, AND ADMINISTRATORS

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 114
 The institution’s owners, governing board members, officials, and administrators
possess appropriate qualifications and experience for their positions and the ability to
oversee institutional operations. The owners, governing board members, officials, and
administrators are knowledgeable and experienced in one or more aspects of
education administration, finance, teaching/learning, and distance study. The
institution’s policies clearly delineate the duties and responsibilities of owners,
governing board members, officials, and administrators. Individuals in leadership and
managerial positions are qualified by education and experience.

B. REPUTATION OF INSTITUTION, OWNERS, GOVERNING BOARD MEMBERS, OFFICIALS,

AND ADMINISTRATORS
The institution and its owners, governing board members, officials, and
administrators possess sound reputations, a record of integrity, and ethical conduct in
their professional activities, business operations, and relations. The institution must
promptly notify DEAC of any investigative, enforcement, legal or prosecutorial
actions which may be initiated or which are current against the institution, its owners,
governing board members, officials and administrators. Such notification shall
include an explanation of the circumstances giving rise to such actions and the
institution’s response to the same as well as its explanation of why such actions
should not be deemed a concern with respect to the integrity of the named persons or
institutions.

C. SUCCESSION PLAN
The institution has written plans that describe the process that it follows in the event
that a leadership succession is necessary. The plan identifies specific people,
committees, or boards responsible to carry on the operation of the institution during
the transition period. The plan includes a business continuity structure that the
institution can implement immediately. The institution reviews and revises the plan
on an annual basis.

IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution’s governance assures ethical decision-making processes in
the efficient and effective use of institutional resources, enabling the achievement of strategic
initiatives. The members of the institution’s governance structure are appropriately qualified
and possess the experience necessary to support the mission, values, and future of the
institution. They support the mission through the implementation of collaborative oversight
for the continuous delivery of high-quality distance education. The members of the
governance structure demonstrate a commitment to all stakeholders by developing a
succession plan that is reviewed annually to assure ongoing institutional operations.

XI. FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

INTRODUCTION

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 115
The institution demonstrates financial capability and stability to meet accreditation standards
on a continuous basis. The institution possesses adequate financial resources in order to meet
its mission and values while delivering high quality educational offerings. The institution
retains qualified and knowledgeable financial leadership to assure continued financial
sustainability. This section identifies five (5) core components of Standard XI.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. FINANCIAL PRACTICES
The institution shows that it is financially responsible by providing complete,
comparative financial statements covering its two most recent fiscal years and by
demonstrating that it has sufficient resources to meet its financial obligations to
provide quality instruction and service to its students. Financial statements are audited
or reviewed and prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles
in the United States of America or International Financial Reporting Standards. The
institution’s budgeting processes demonstrate that current and future budgeted
operating results are sufficient to allow the institution to accomplish its mission and
goals.

B. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
Individuals overseeing the fiscal and budgeting processes are qualified by education
and experience. The institution employs adequate administrative staff for effective
operations, and at least one person is qualified and able to prepare accurate financial
reports in a timely manner. Internal auditing trails and controls are in place to assure
that finances are properly managed, monitored, and protected. Adequate safeguards
prevent unauthorized access to online and on-site financial information.

C. FINANCIAL STABILITY AND SUSTAINABILITY

The institution maintains adequate administrative staff and other resources to operate
effectively as a going concern and is not exposed to undue or insurmountable risk.
Any risk that exists is adequately monitored, manageable, and insured. In the event
the financial operations of the institution are supported by a parent company or a third
party, audited or reviewed financial statements are provided by the supporting entity
to demonstrate that the supporting entity possesses sufficient financial resources to
provide the institution continued financial sustainability, as well as the commitment
to do so. If the institution’s financial performance is included within the parent
corporation’s statements, a supplemental schedule for the individual institution is
appended to the parent statement.

D. FINANCIAL REPORTING
Financial statements are prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting
principles in the United States of America often referred to as “GAAP,” including the
accrual method of accounting. An independent certified public accountant (CPA)
audit or review report accompanies these statements.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 116
 1. The institution’s financial statements reflect sufficient liquid assets to provide
for a staff and faculty.

2. Annually, the institution has the option of submitting one of these two types of
financial statements, unless the Commission directs the institution to submit
audited financial statements.

Audited comparative financial statements containing an audit opinion

by an independent certified public accountant in accordance with
standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants, or
Reviewed comparative financial statements containing a review report
by an independent certified public accountant in accordance with
standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants.

When circumstances raise a concern as to the financial soundness and stability

of an institution, the Commission may, in its discretion, require that the
institution deliver within a specified period of time (as reasonably determined
by the Commission taking into account, for example, the exigency of the
concerns and the size of the institution), audited comparative financial
statements or such other financial documentation as the Commission may
determine will provide information as to the institution’s financial health and
status.

3. Financial statements submitted must include the institution’s fiscal statement

for the two most recent fiscal years prepared on a comparative basis or a date
specified by the Commission, the CPA’s opinion letter or review report, and a
letter of financial statement validation.

E. DEMONSTRATED OPERATIONS
In all respects, the institution documents continuous sound and ethical operations,
including the necessary resources to accommodate demand and assure that all
learners receive a quality educational experience. The institution’s name is free from
any association with activity that could damage the reputation of the DEAC
accrediting process, such as illegal actions, fraud, unethical conduct, or abuse of
consumers.

IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution employs qualified and experienced financial leadership
who possess the capacity to meet accreditation standards. The institution exhibits
effective business practices through fiscally responsible policies and procedures designed
to assure ongoing stability. The institution follows generally accepted accounting
principles that guide all financial and reporting practices. The institution demonstrates
adequate financial management that promotes financial sustainability.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 117
XII. FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES, RECORD PROTECTION AND
RETENTION
INTRODUCTION
The institution maintains facilities, equipment, and supplies that promote and support its
mission and values. The institution’s procedures for determining budgets assure that
financial resources are adequate to support continued growth and provide a safe work
environment for faculty and staff. Institutions demonstrate adequate protection for all
records and implement appropriate retention policies as required by applicable federal
and state laws and authorization rules. Institutional facilities, equipment, supplies, and
record protection and retention procedures meet accepted educational, administrative,
business, and legal practices. This section identifies three (3) core components of
Standard XII.

CORE COMPONENTS

A. FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, AND SUPPLIES

The institution maintains sufficient facilities, equipment, and supplies to achieve its
mission and values and support its educational offerings for future operations. A
written plan outlines the maintenance and upgrade of facilities, equipment, and
supplies and includes a disaster response and recovery plan. The plan states the
resources that are budgeted to support its goals. Buildings, workspace, and equipment
comply with local fire, building, health, and safety regulations and are appropriately
equipped to handle the educational program(s) of the institution.

B. IN-RESIDENCE PROGRAM COMPONENT

The institution provides appropriate training facilities for students participating in in-
residence training and information on housing, as applicable. The facilities are in
compliance with all state and federal requirements. The institution maintains adequate
insurance to protect students, faculty, and staff while participating in in-residence
training.

C. RECORD PROTECTION
The institution’s financial, administrative, and student educational records are
maintained in a reasonably accessible place and are adequately protected in
accordance with applicable federal and state laws.

1. If maintaining documents electronically, the institution provides audit records

to verify that the images were properly created and validated.

2. If an institution accepts digitally signed transcripts or electronically

transferred verified data from an outside source, the institution documents the
outside source using a system that provides registration and verification of
participants, protocols for securely sending and receiving files, logging of file
transmissions, and electronic notification. The outside source complies with

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 118
 all applicable laws and regulations governing the activities and services
provided, including FERPA and other laws concerning the privacy and
confidentiality of information and records.

D. RECORD RETENTION
The institution’s financial, administrative, and student educational records are
retained in accordance with applicable federal and state laws. The institution
implements a comprehensive document retention policy.

E. STATE AUTHORIZATION
1. The institution is properly licensed, authorized, exempted, or approved by all
applicable state education institutional authorizations (or their equivalent for non-
U.S. institutions).

2. Exemptions from state law are supported by state-issued documentation or in

statutory language for that state.

IMPACT STATEMENT
A DEAC-accredited institution maintains sufficient physical and fiscal resources and
support systems to deliver quality distance education programs that enable students to
achieve their educational goals. The physical facilities promote the safety and welfare of
all faculty and administrative support staff. Individuals in leadership roles are
appropriately qualified by education and experience to develop written facilities plans
and emergency action plans to support the mission, growth, and sustainability of the
institution. The institution demonstrates a commitment to ethical business practices by
maintaining institutional records, student records, and student privacy in accordance with
applicable federal and state laws.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 119
 PART FOUR: APPENDICES

I. CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY

It is in the best interest of the Distance Education Accrediting Commission (DEAC) to be
aware of and properly manage all conflicts of interest and appearances of a conflict of
interest. This conflict of interest policy is designed to help accrediting commissioners,
evaluators, subject specialists, consultants, administrative staff, appeals panel members,
and employees of the DEAC to identify situations that present potential conflicts of
interest and to provide DEAC with a procedure to appropriately manage conflicts and
ensure that its accrediting activities are conducted in an environment free of bias, in
accordance with legal requirements and the goals of accountability and transparency in
DEAC’s operations.

A. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DEFINED

For purposes of this policy, a person with a conflict of interest is referred to as an
“interested person.” The following circumstances shall be deemed to create a
conflict of interest:

Ownership of some or all of an institution, its assets, or the stock of the

company that owns or operates the institution;
The holding of mortgages, liens, or other debt instruments or interest upon an
institution or its assets;
Having been employed, or currently employed, at the institution;
Currently employed with a DEAC institution that competes with the
institution;
Having served, or currently serving, as a consultant to the institution;
Having served, or currently serving, on a board, advisory council, or
committee of the institution;
Having attended the institution as a student;
Having financial interest (including holding stocks, etc.) in the institution or
a business or enterprise that competes with DEAC;
Having a close personal friend or family member at the institution; or
Having accepted gifts, entertainment, or other favors from individuals or
entities (see below).

Other situations may create the appearance of a conflict or present a duality of interests in
connection with a person who has influence over the activities or finances of the DEAC.

All such circumstances should be disclosed to the DEAC executive director, as

appropriate, and a decision made as to what course of action the organization or
individuals should take so that the best interests of the DEAC are not compromised by the
personal interests of stakeholders in the DEAC.

B. GIFTS, GRATUITIES, AND ENTERTAINMENT

Accepting gifts, entertainment, or other favors from individuals or entities can also result
in a conflict or duality of interest when the party providing the gift/entertainment/favor

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 120
does so under circumstances where it might be inferred that such action was intended to
influence or possibly would influence the interested person in the performance of his or
her duties. Souvenirs (typically available to the public) are permissible but should be
restricted to inexpensive items representing the institution.

1. DEFINITIONS
In this policy, the following terms are defined as:

a. A “conflict of interest” is any circumstance described in part A of this policy.

b. An “interested person” is any person serving as commissioner, evaluator,

subject specialist, consultant, administrative staff, appeals panel member,
or employee of DEAC or anyone else who is in a position of control over
DEAC and has a personal interest that is in conflict with the interests of
DEAC.

c. A “family member” is a spouse, parent, child, or spouse of a child or a

brother, sister, or spouse of a brother or sister, of an interested person.

d. A “material financial interest” in an entity is a financial interest of any kind,

which, in view of all the circumstances, is substantial enough that it would,
or reasonably could, affect an interested person’s or family member’s
judgment with respect to transactions to which the entity is a party. Where
the potential for pecuniary gain or the appearance of it is involved, as in
reporting on or evaluating a current or potential direct competitor or partner
or an institution in which the participant has a financial interest, the
participant has a conflict of interest.

e. An “appearance of a conflict” means there is an appearance of partiality

involved, as in a situation where the person who has a conflict of interest
has a relationship with an institution or its principals such that evaluations
or decisions may appear to be unduly influenced by that relationship.

f. A “duality of interests” means when a person has divided loyalties or

when a person has a personal interest that conflicts with the interest of
DEAC.

2. PROCEDURES
The procedures for addressing a conflict of interest, an appearance of a conflict,
or a duality of interests are as follows:

a. Prior to a Commission meeting, an on-site evaluation, a course/program

review, an appeals panel hearing, a consultation, or any action on an
institution involving a conflict of interest, the person having a conflict of
interest shall disclose to the DEAC executive director all facts material to
the conflict of interest. If any interested persons are aware that staff or
other persons have a conflict of interest, relevant facts should be disclosed

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 121
 by the interested person him/herself to the executive director for purposes
of disclosure.

b. Where the appearance of partiality is involved, as in a situation where the

person who has a conflict of interest has a relationship with an institution
or its principals such that evaluations or decisions may appear to be unduly
influenced by that relationship, the person with the conflict of interest must
advise the next higher person in the process and must recuse him/herself.
Guidance should be sought from the DEAC executive director in
questionable cases.

c. A person who has a conflict of interest shall not participate in or be

permitted to hear any discussion of or to vote on any matter being
considered. Such person shall not attempt to exert his or her personal
influence with respect to the matter, either at or outside the meeting.

d. In the event it is not entirely clear that a conflict of interest exists, the
individual with the potential conflict shall disclose the circumstances to the
DEAC staff member/executive director, who shall determine whether a
conflict of interest exists that is subject to this policy.

3. CONFIDENTIALITY
Protecting confidentiality is an important part of the accreditation process.
Interested persons are reminded of the following:

a. Each accrediting commissioner, evaluator, subject specialist, consultant,

administrative staff, appeals panel member, or employee shall exercise
care not to disclose confidential information acquired in connection with
disclosures of conflicts of interest or potential conflicts, which might be
adverse to the interests of DEAC.

b. Accrediting commissioners, evaluators, subject specialists, consultants,

administrative staff, appeals panel members, and employees will not
discuss any confidential aspect of an application for DEAC accreditation
with the applicant, an institution accredited by DEAC, a direct competitor
of the applicant, or any other third party except as required in order to
discharge the responsibilities of the participant in the accreditation review.
DEAC will communicate the results of the Commission’s decision to the
applicant and the public.

c. Furthermore, accrediting commissioners, evaluators, subject specialists,

consultants, administrative staff, appeals panel members, and employees
shall not disclose or use information relating to the business of DEAC for
their personal profit or advantage or the personal profit or advantage of
their family member(s).

4. REVIEW OF POLICY

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 122
 The following describes the review process for this policy:

a. Each accrediting commissioner, evaluator, subject specialist, consultant,

administrative staff, appeals panel member, or employee shall be
provided with and asked to review a copy of this policy and to
acknowledge in writing that he or she has done so.

b. Each accrediting commissioner, evaluator, subject specialist, consultant,

administrative staff, appeals panel member, or employee shall complete a
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form identifying any relationships,
positions or circumstances in which s/he is involved that s/he believes could
present a conflict of interest.

c. Any such information regarding the business interests of an accrediting

commissioner, evaluator, subject specialist, consultant, administrative staff,
appeals panel member, or DEAC employee, or a family member thereof,
shall be treated as confidential and shall generally be made available only
to the executive director and any committee appointed to address conflicts
of interest, except to the extent additional disclosure is necessary in
connection with the implementation of this policy.

d. This policy shall be reviewed annually by each member of the Accrediting

Commission. Any changes to the policy shall be communicated to all staff
and interested persons.

e. On-site evaluators must annually read and agree to the conditions of the
DEAC Code of Conduct for On-Site Evaluators in addition to this policy.

5. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE FORM

This form is completed annually by each accrediting commissioner, evaluator,
subject specialist, consultant, administrative staff, appeals panel member, or
employee.

I agree to complete the Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form for all institutions I
review.

I have read and received a copy of DEAC’s Conflict of Interest Policy.

Name: ______________________ Signature: ______________________

Title: _______________________ E-mail: ________________________
Institution/Company: _______________________ Date: _____________

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 123
II. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE FORM
Name: _______________________________ E-mail: _____________________________

Institution(s) being reviewed: ____________________ Date Visit/Review/Meeting: ______

Your Position: ________________________________

Please note that a separate form must be completed for each occasion. For multiple
institutions, a list or agenda may be attached to this document.

Conflict of Interest: The following circumstances shall be deemed to create a conflict of

interest:

Ownership of some or all of an institution, its assets, or the stock of the company
that owns or operates the institution;
The holding of mortgages, liens, or other debt instruments or interest upon an institution
or its assets;
Having been employed, or currently employed, at the institution;
Currently employed with a DEAC institution that competes with the institution;
Having served, or currently serving, as a consultant to the institution;
Having served, or currently serving, on a board, advisory council, or committee of the
institution;
Having attended the institution as a student;
Having financial interest (including holding stocks, etc.) in the institution or a business
or enterprise that competes with DEAC;
Having a close personal friend or family member at the institution; or
Having accepted gifts, entertainment or other favors from individuals or entities (see
below).

I do not have a conflict of interest with this/these institution(s)

I do have a conflict of interest to report (please describe on next page)

Other situations may create the appearance of a conflict or present a duality of interests in
connection with a person who has influence over the activities or finances of the DEAC. All
such circumstances should be disclosed to the DEAC executive director, as appropriate, and
a decision made as to what course of action the organization or individuals should take so
that the best interests of the DEAC are not compromised by the personal interests of
stakeholders in the DEAC.

I hereby certify that the information set forth above is true and complete to the best
of my knowledge. I have reviewed, and agree to abide by, DEAC’s Conflict of
Interest Policy.

Signature: Today’s Date: ______________

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 124
Description of possible conflict of interest:
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 125
III. CODE OF CONDUCT FOR ON-SITE EVALUATORS

A. High standards of honesty, integrity, and impartiality by on-site evaluators are

essential for the proper performance of the Distance Education Accrediting
Commission’s business and the maintenance of confidence by institutions in the
accreditation process. This confidence is influenced not only by the way an on-site
evaluator conducts him/herself, but also in the way he/she conducts him/herself in the
eyes of other accredited institutions and the public. To help on-site evaluators avoid
any misconduct and conflicts of interest and to ensure that DEAC’s accreditation
activities are conducted in an environment free of bias, DEAC has adopted the
following code of conduct.

As an on-site evaluator, I agree to:

1. conduct myself in a manner which seeks to avoid a conflict of interest or any

appearance of conflict of interest;

2. read, sign, and abide by DEAC’s Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form;

3. engage in no outside employment or other outside activity not compatible

with the full and proper discharge of the responsibilities of a member of
the DEAC Examining Committee;

4. recruit no staff or offer my services, nor shall I take any information or

materials for personal interest or gain during the on-site evaluation;

5. state no opinion or prediction concerning possible action by the Commission

that may result from the on-site evaluation;

6. direct any inquiries I may have, or request for additional information after the
on-site visit, to the DEAC staff;

7. treat all information obtained through the institution’s participation in the

accreditation process as confidential, and not disclose such information to
parties other than members of the examining committee, the Commission,
and the DEAC staff except pursuant to valid governmental regulation or
judicial procedure;

8. participate in no litigation or other legal proceedings involving institutions

that are or may seek to become accredited by DEAC without consulting
with DEAC’s counsel and the executive director;

9. discuss no accreditation matters on behalf of the appeals panel or

Commission with members of the media, referring any media inquiries to the
executive director;

10. discuss no legal matters involving the institution evaluated or to be

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 126
 evaluated with counsel for the institution or any third party;

11. exercise due diligence in becoming familiar with, and an authority on,
DEAC accreditation standards and policies;

12. participate in a training program prior to my participation in on-site

evaluations that include training on DEAC’s Conflict of Interest Policy,
exercise due diligence in preparing for the institution’s on-site evaluation,
and come to the on-site evaluation familiar with all assigned materials and
prepared to fully participate in the process;

13. participate fully in the process and otherwise conduct myself during the
on-site visit in a manner consistent with my best, impartial and unfettered
judgment, and in furtherance of the Commission’s purpose;

14. conduct myself professionally, impartially, and courteously during the on-site
evaluation; and

15. report any alleged violations of the Code of Conduct immediately to the DEAC
executive director.

B. CODE OF CONDUCT FOR ON-SITE EVALUATORS AGREEMENT

This form is completed annually.

I have read and agree to the conditions and have received a copy of the DEAC Code of
Conduct for On-Site Evaluators.

Name: ____________________________ Signature: _________________________

Date: ____________________________

If the DEAC staff member or Commission member should determine that an on-site
evaluator has violated the DEAC Code of Conduct, he/she may sanction the
offending on-site evaluator through an oral or written reprimand or prohibit that
individual from being a member of any DEAC evaluation team in the future.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 127
IV. SELECTING AND TRAINING COMMISSIONERS
A. PROCEDURES FOR THE SELECTING AND TRAINING DEAC COMMISSIONERS
The process of selecting and vetting an individual to serve on the Commission
begins with DEAC’s Nominating Committee. The Committee is charged with
nominating individuals to be elected or appointed to the Accrediting Commission.
Institution members of the Commission are elected by DEAC-accredited members,
and public members of the Commission are appointed by the Accrediting
Commission. The Nominating Committee is comprised of five individuals, three
from the DEAC-accredited membership not currently serving on the Commission
and two Commissioners, with one being a public member.

Nominations come from interested persons, the general public, and DEAC-
accredited members. Using the qualifications described below, the executive
director first interviews the nominees to see if they are willing to perform the
responsibilities required of Commissioners, including completing the training,
time commitments, and meeting dates and to identify any conflict of interests.

For institution commissioners, the Nominating Committee reviews and vets the
nominees’ résumés. Once candidates are recommended by the Nominating
Committee and confirmed by the Commission, the nominations for institution
members are published for a period not less than 30 days prior to the Annual
Business Meeting of the DEAC. Once the nominations are closed, the members of
DEAC vote.

The nominations for the public commissioners are presented to the members of the
Commission, who make the final appointment. Commissioners have the
opportunity to interact with nominees as public commissioner candidates are
invited to observe an Accrediting Commission meeting before the Commission
votes on appointments.

B. SIZE AND MAKE-UP OF THE COMMISSION

The selection criteria used for the Board of Directors who serve as the Accrediting
Commission are prescribed by the DEAC Bylaws Article IV Directors. Under
Section 2, it states the Board of Directors will “consist of ten (10) Directors, five
(5) Institutional Directors from Members of the Corporation elected by the
Members and five (5) Public Directors appointed by the Board of Directors to
represent the public. Under Section 3 it states that at least two members of the
Commission must be “academics,” defined by DEAC as a person who works full
time at an educational institution who, possibly in addition to other duties, actively
teaches, delivers educational content to learners, or engages in educational
research related to the institution’s mission. At least two members of the
Commission must be “administrators” defined by DEAC as a person currently or
recently directly engaged in a significant manner in the administration of an
institution.”

At its Annual Business Meeting, the DEAC members elect directors from the

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 128
 ranks of accredited members to replace those whose terms of office expire that
year. Public members are appointed by the Board of Directors to replace public
members whose terms expire.

When an unexpected vacancy occurs by reason of resignation or otherwise, or

when a Commission member from an accredited institution is no longer currently
active in academic or administrative functions, the Chair of the Commission will
declare the position vacant, and the Chair will appoint a qualified individual to fill
the position, who will thereby start his/her own first term upon taking his/her seat
on the Commission.

By custom, the Chair of the Board of Directors is a public Commissioner who has
at least two years of service remaining on his or her term. Normally, a Chair does
not serve more than three years as the Chair. Also by custom, the Vice Chair has at
least two years of service remaining on his or her term. Normally, a Vice Chair
does not serve more than three years as the Vice Chair.

C. QUALIFICATIONS OF COMMISSIONERS

Public Commissioners: Public Commissioners are selected from diversified

fields and backgrounds to include, insofar as possible, representatives from
government, industry, business, finance, and education.

In seeking individuals to be recommended for appointment to the Board of Directors,

the DEAC Nominating Committee considers individuals whose qualifications and
experience will provide expertise that would best help the Commission deal with
special areas of institution evaluation (i.e., finance, administration, management,
curriculum, etc.).

In addition to the above, the following informal guidelines will be considered in

appointing Public Commissioners from outside the distance study field:

1. Personal qualities of leadership, integrity, ability, and personal reputation; and

2. Formal education—earning one or more appropriately accredited academic

degrees.

A Public Commissioner may not be 1) an employee, member of the governing board,

owner, or shareholder of, or consultant to, an institution that either is accredited by
DEAC or has applied for such accreditation; 2) a member of any organization that
transacts business with or receives any funding or payments from DEAC; or 3) a
spouse, parent, child, or sibling of an individual identified in 1) or 2) above.

Institution Commissioners: Institution Commissioners are selected from DEAC-

accredited institutions and are individuals who are currently active academic or
administrative personnel who do not have a representative currently serving on the
Accrediting Commission.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 129
 The Commissioners are selected so that they are representative of the variety of
institutions in the Distance Education Accrediting Commission and the distance
education field insofar as possible.

In addition to the above, the following informal guidelines are considered in

appointing Commissioners from the distance study institution field:

1. The personal qualities of leadership, integrity, ability, and personal reputation;

2. Formal education—holding one or more appropriately accredited academic

degrees;

3. Experience in the distance study field with a contemporary knowledge of the

field;

4. Demonstrated supportiveness of the accrediting program;

5. Experience as a member of Accrediting Examining Committees; and

6. Interest in and support of the Distance Education Accrediting Commission as

evidenced by regular attendance at DEAC functions and personal as well as
institutional participation on committees and at DEAC workshops,
conferences, and other events.

All Commissioners must have an interest and willingness to serve and should be
able to devote the time to do the necessary reading and background preparation
and attend all Commission meetings so that they can serve effectively.

D. RESPONSIBILITIES OF COMMISSIONERS
The Commissioners have the following responsibilities consistent with the DEAC
Bylaws. The Commission’s responsibilities are:

1. Establish, implement, and promulgate standards and policies reflecting the

qualities of sound and reputable distance education and training institutions and
determine effective procedures and administrative guidelines for evaluating
distance education and training institutions seeking DEAC accreditation.

2. Receive and act upon applications for accreditation and reaccreditation from
distance education institutions, evaluate new programs submitted for approval,
decide the merits of any petitions from institutions, and oversee an ongoing
program that ensures all standards are policies are effective, current, and
compliant with existing requirements for a recognized accrediting association.

3. Conduct an institutional accreditation program that is compliant with

extant federal and CHEA-adopted recognition criteria for nationally
recognized accrediting associations.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 130
 4. Review the reports of evaluation committees and all other pertinent materials,
including the Self-Evaluation Report, and, acting as a joint body of decision
makers, accredit, deny, or withdraw accreditation from accredited institutions
or order a Show Cause. In cases where accreditation is withdrawn or denied,
the institution will be given the reasons for the adverse decision and will be
given the opportunity of appealing the adverse decision before it becomes
final.

5. Re-evaluate accredited institutions at reasonable intervals.

6. Exercise such other powers and duties as are necessary to carry out the
functions of a nationally recognized accrediting association.

E. TRAINING OF COMMISSIONERS
Commissioners must successfully complete DEAC’s online course entitled,
“DEAC Evaluator’s Training Program,” before attending their first Commission
meeting. In addition to the online training course, DEAC’s staff provides an
annual training seminar. All Commissioners are required to attend this seminar.
Items covered during this seminar include the mission and goals of DEAC; the
history, traditions, and culture of the commission; the accreditation process and
how Accrediting Commission meetings are conducted; how applications are
processed, from start to finish; duties and obligations of Commission members;
how the Commission makes decisions; enforcement of timelines; ethics, conflicts
of interest, confidentiality of the process and legal issues; appeals panel role and
function; and how to execute Commissioners duties and stay current. Recusals are
addressed in the conflicts of interest session.

All Commissioners are also required to occasionally participate in an on-site

evaluation as an observer. DEAC provides additional training through its
workshops and webinars, which the Commissioners routinely participate in or
attend. Commissioners also keep current on any changes to DEAC’s standards,
policies, or procedures through information provided in DEAC’s numerous
publications and through its website postings.

F. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Each Commissioner is required to review, sign, and abide by the DEAC Conflict
of Interest Policy each January. Each Commission must also review, sign, and
abide by DEAC’s Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form before each Commission
meeting. These forms are kept on file or stored electronically at the DEAC office
in Washington, D.C.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 131
V. SELECTING AND TRAINING EVALUATORS
A. PROCEDURES FOR SELECTING AND TRAINING DEAC EVALUATORS
The Distance Education Accrediting Commission prides itself on attracting competent
and knowledgeable individuals to serve as on-site evaluators and subject specialists.
The selection of evaluators and subject specialist reviewers is based upon the
judgment of the director of accreditation acting under the established guidelines of this
policy. Each on-site team has academic and administrative personnel represented.

B. ON-SITE EVALUATORS
The Commission trains and uses top executives and other staff from accredited
institutions as on-site evaluators, as well as highly qualified academic experts from
other accredited higher education institutions and from other sectors of society. In the
vast majority of cases, each examining committee is comprised the CEOs or senior
executive officers of accredited institutions, thus ensuring an authentic “peer review”
from the ranks of the most highly respected practitioners in the field.

Evaluators are also selected from among accredited public and private institution
educators, executives, and practitioners in business, technical, and service fields.
Evaluation teams are made up of a mix of educators and practitioners. Some of the
evaluators are retired persons who have otherwise remained active in their field of
expertise.

As an added safeguard to ensure against potential or perceived conflicts in the

selection of visiting evaluators, applicant institutions receive an examination schedule
containing the names and affiliations of visiting evaluators and short biographies on
each evaluator. The institutions then have an opportunity to discuss any specific
objections they may have to a particular evaluator. In the case where an expressed
objection is found to be valid, the executive director will appoint another evaluator to
take the place of the evaluator who had been questioned.

To become a qualified examiner, one must complete an online or paper-based

training program entitled DEAC Evaluator Training Program and receive a
certificate of completion. The Accrediting Commission maintains a record of the
qualifications of people who have been trained as on-site evaluators through this
training program.

Before new evaluators are asked to serve on an on-site team, they must:

1. Have demonstrated expertise, ability, and accomplishment in the area they are
selected to examine;

2. Read, agree to abide by, and sign the DEAC Code of Conduct for On-Site
Evaluators, which includes reading, agreeing to abide by, and signing DEAC’s
Conflict of Interest Policy and Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Form (see
below); and

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 132
 3. Have completed the training program, DEAC Evaluator Training Program.

In selecting evaluators for visits, the director of accreditation considers the nature
of the institution being visited, the methods of operation unique to the institution,
the nature of the program(s) offered, and the expertise and past examining
experience of the evaluator. For visits to degree-granting institutions, a subject
specialist is always included. These evaluators must possess an academic degree
that is in a similar field and one higher than the degrees being offered by the
institution, or the relevant terminal degree.

C. SUBJECT SPECIALIST
Special care is given to select professionals for subject specialists who are current and
knowledgeable in their area of expertise (i.e., evaluation of curriculum content that
reflects up-to-date technologies and skills). The vast majority of subject matter experts
come to the Commission from regionally accredited institutions of higher learning,
often by personal recommendation of the executive officers of higher education
associations, e.g., the American Council on Education or any of the regional
accrediting associations. The various specialized accrediting associations offer a rich
source of potential qualified subject specialist evaluators. DEAC makes effective use
of its working relationships with the various accrediting bodies to obtain and build an
extensive roster of highly qualified experts.

To be selected as a subject specialist, the Commission asks that the person evidence
no bias against the distance education method or no conflict of interest with the
institution. For vocational courses, special care is given in selecting current
practitioners who are working in the field of study. As discussed above, for degree
programs, the subject specialists must have the appropriate academic degrees from an
institution accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education
and/or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Typically, the subject
specialist must have a degree that is one higher than the degree being evaluated or the
appropriate terminal degree. The degrees must be related to the degrees being
evaluated. For doctorate degrees, the evaluator must have the same doctorate degree
and have practiced in the field for several years before he or she would be considered
for the evaluation.

To become a qualified subject specialist, one must complete the training program
entitled DEAC Evaluator Training Program and receive a certificate of completion.
The Accrediting Commission maintains a record of the qualifications of people who
have been trained as subject specialists through this training program.

The duty of a subject specialist is to determine if curriculum materials offered by the

institution are complete, accurate, and up to date in light of the stated objectives of the
course. The subject specialist must judge whether the course is of good quality and
whether it meets the published standards of the Accrediting Commission. For credit-
bearing courses, the subject specialists must be able to judge the comparability of
curricula to in-residence programs.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 133
 Subject specialists are used for evaluating courses off site and on site. The Commission’s
Guide for Subject Specialist Evaluators on DEAC’s website describes the responsibilities
for both types of reviewers. Each subject specialist is given the appropriate rating forms.

For visits to degree-granting institutions, a subject specialist is always appointed to the

on-site committee visiting the institution. When a subject specialist accompanies an on-
site team to the institution, he/she is able to follow up on questions related to the course
materials by examining the institution’s procedures for offering its educational programs.

DEAC staff is available to answer any questions from subject specialists concerning the
accreditation standards, policies, and procedures.

D. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Every evaluator and subject specialist must read, sign, and abide by DEAC’s Conflict
of Interest Policy and the Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form before reviewing any
institution and its program as part of the accreditation process. In addition, on-site
evaluators and subject specialist must also read, sign, and abide by DEAC’s Code of
Conduct for On-Site Evaluators.

E. FUNCTIONS OF EVALUATING TEAM MEMBERS

The following outlines the roles and responsibilities for each evaluating team
member.

1. Readiness Assessment Evaluator

Reviews institution’s initial Self-Evaluation Report and Exhibits
Submits report to the director of accreditation and determines if the
institution is ready for an on-site visit.

2. Chair
Coordinates visit
Ensures that evaluators complete their tasks during the on-site visit
Sets date for report submission
Prepares Chair’s Report
Submits Chair’s Report to the director of accreditation

3. Education Evaluator
Evaluates institution’s compliance with accreditation standards using
DEAC rating forms
Submits report to the Chair and the director of accreditation
Verifies special areas through documentation and interviews:
o Institutional mission
o Institutional effectiveness and strategic planning
o Program outcomes, curricula, and materials
o Educational and student support services
o Student achievement and satisfaction
o Academic leadership and faculty qualifications
o Admissions practices

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 134
 Reviews comments from subject specialists
Handles special concern by reviewing:
o Student surveys and/or complaints
o Curricula and online platforms
o Student records and tracking progression
o Course/program completions
o Examinations and other assessments
o Faculty interaction
o Outcomes assessment plan and data
o Student and faculty files
o Minutes of board, advisory boards, faculty meetings, curriculum
committees, etc.
o Strategic plan and other research
o Succession plan

4. Business Evaluator
Evaluates institution’s compliance with accreditation standards using
DEAC rating forms
Submits report to the Chair and director of accreditation
Verifies special areas through documentation and interviews:
o Enrollment agreements
o Financial disclosures, cancellations, and refund policies
o Institutional governance
o Financial responsibility
o Facilities, equipment, supplies, record protection and retention
Handles special concerns by reviewing:
o Financial statements
o Enrollment agreements
o Refund policies
o Catalog, advertisements, and website
o Facilities, equipment, supplies, and record protection

5. Degree Program Evaluator

Evaluates accreditation standards using DEAC rating forms
Submits report to the Chair and director of accreditation
Reviews subject specialists’ comments
Handles special concerns by reviewing:
o Program outcomes, curricula, and instructional materials
o Faculty qualifications
o Student/faculty ratios
o Credit hour policy and data

6. Subject Specialists
Evaluates accreditation standards using DEAC rating forms
Submits report to the Chair and director of accreditation
Reviews curricula, assignments/examinations, student/faculty interaction

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 135
 Interviews faculty/instructors and students

7. DEAC Staff Member

Coordinates schedules and logistics
Answers questions concerning accreditation standards and procedures

8. State Agency Observer

Participates as a full member of the on-site team
Provides pertinent information from state files
Observes institution’s evaluation and accreditation process
Files comments to DEAC (optional)

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 136
VI. SELECTING AND TRAINING APPEALS PANEL MEMBERS
A. PROCEDURES FOR SELECTING AND TRAINING DEAC APPEALS PANEL MEMBERS
Part Two, Section XII of the DEAC Accreditation Handbook states that an
institution may appeal a decision by the Accrediting Commission to deny or
withdraw accreditation. This policy details the process of selecting the members of
the appeals panel, their responsibilities, and training.

B. APPEALS PROCESS
An institution’s appeal is heard by an independent appeals panel that is separate
from the Commission and serves as an additional level of due process for the
institution. The appeals panel has no authority concerning the reasonableness or
appropriateness of eligibility criteria, policies, procedures, or accreditation
standards. The panel is not empowered to overrule the Commission by imposing
its own determinations on what the panel believes should constitute adequate
procedures, institution response times, or other administrative policies
promulgated by the Commission. It can only affirm, amend, remand, or reverse a
prior decision of the Commission as set forth below. Its role is to determine
whether the Commission’s adverse action was not supported by the record or was
clearly erroneous. The institutions, both initial applicants and accredited
institutions, always have the burden of proof in demonstrating that an adverse
action of the Commission was not supported by the record or was otherwise
erroneous.

C. PROCESS FOR SELECTION OF AN APPEALS PANEL MEMBER

The process of selecting and vetting a person to serve on the appeals panel begins
with the Commission selecting from a pool of candidates meeting the criteria
below.

The appeals panel will consist of three people appointed by the Accrediting
Commission. One will represent the public interest, one will represent
academic/education interests, and one will be a distance education institution
administrator/executive. Potential members of appeals panels will be selected
from the ranks of former members of the Accrediting Commission, the corps of
Commission evaluators, and active staff of DEAC-accredited institutions who
have completed the DEAC evaluator training program. All panelists are subject to
DEAC’s Conflict of Interest Policy and are vetted to assure that they are free from
any subject matter bias before being selected for a particular appeal.

The Commission selects three people to serve on the appeals panel: a public
member, an academic, and an administrator. Once the Commission appoints the
three people and they accept, the executive director submits the names and
qualifications of the appeals panel members to the institution in advance. An
institution has 10 days from the receipt of the panel members’ names to object on
the basis of possible conflict of interest as described in DEAC’s Conflict of
Interest Policy. If the Commission determines that a conflict exists, the panelist is
replaced. No panel member may serve if he/she participated, in any respect, in the

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 137
 underlying decision by the Accrediting Commission to deny or withdraw the
accreditation of the institution

D. TRAINING OF APPEALS PANEL MEMBERS

Once the appeals panel members are chosen, DEAC works with the institution and
the panel members to set a date for the appeal hearing. In preparation for hearing
the institution’s appeal, the panel members are sent the documentation needed to
perform their tasks. The panel members are briefed by DEAC’s executive director
and legal counsel on their responsibilities and duties. An outside mediator may or
may not be brought in to conduct the appeals hearing. The consideration of the
appeal is based upon the Commission’s written findings and reasons related to the
action, the institution’s written response detailing grounds for appeal, and relevant
supportive documents.

The appeals panel members are told the date, time, and place of the appeals
hearing. They are also provided an agenda of the meeting, which contains of the
names and titles of the people attending the hearing. DEAC staff works with panel
members to arrange for transportation and hotel accommodations, which DEAC
pays for.

The institution must set forth the specific grounds for its appeal and state the
reasons the institution believes the adverse decision should be set aside or revised.
In making its appeal, the institution has the burden to show that the Commission’s
decision resulted from errors or omissions in the execution of Commission policies
and procedures, or that the decision was arbitrary or capricious and was not based
on substantial evidence on the record. No new materials may be presented for the
appeals panel’s consideration on appeal.

E. RESPONSIBILITY AND DUTIES OF THE APPEALS PANEL MEMBERS

The appeals panel members shall have the following responsibilities, consistent
with DEAC policies and procedures:

1. when appointed to the appeals panel, s/he must read, sign, and abide by
DEAC’s Conflict of Interest Policy and sign the Conflict of Interest
Disclosure Form. These forms must be submitted to DEAC within 10 days
after agreeing to serve on an appeals panel;

2. exercise due diligence in becoming familiar with, and an authority on,

DEAC standards, policies, and procedures, and participate in all
training sessions conducted by DEAC’s staff;

3. agree to review all documentation pertinent to the institution’s appeal;

4. treat all information obtained through the institution’s participation in the

appeal process as confidential, and do not disclose such information to parties
other than the DEAC staff and legal counsel;

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 138
 5. direct any inquiries s/he may have, or request for additional information
after the appeal hearing to the DEAC executive director;

6. state no opinion or prediction concerning possible actions the Commission

may take as a result of the appeal hearing; and

7. exercise such powers and duties as are necessary to carry out the functions of a
DEAC appeals panel.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 139
VII. OBLIGATIONS OF ACCREDITATION
Accreditation brings with it a number of obligations for the institution. An accredited
institution must continue to meet all accreditation standards. The institution must continue
to justify the confidence placed in it by DEAC and improve itself in all areas. Accredited
institutions are obligated to:

A. FILE AN ANNUAL REPORT

Each accredited institution is required to file an Annual Report form to the
Commission. The institution must advise the Commission of significant changes since
its initial or last renewal of accreditation cycle. An institution is assessed a late fee if
its Annual Report is not submitted by January 31. As part of the Annual Report, the
institution must report its data on course completion and program graduation rates.
The institution must also submit data on students’ satisfaction as demonstrated by the
percentage of students who answer affirmatively to the three mandatory DEAC
questions.

B. PAY ANNUAL DUES AND ACCREDITATION FEES

An accredited institution is charged an annual accreditation fee to sustain the
accreditation process. As a member of DEAC, each member institution is charged
annual dues. These dues support the research and professional activities of DEAC.
The dues and fees are based on annual tuition receipts. An institution must submit a
completed “Computation for Dues and Fees Form.” A statement is sent to the
institution indicating the amount of dues and accreditation fees owed. Dues and fees
not paid in full by April 30 are charged a late fee. An accredited institution failing to
meet its financial obligations to DEAC by September 30 is subject to a special
accreditation visit.

C. TEACH-OUT COMMITMENT
The institution should be mindful of its formal commitment to “teach out” all students
who enroll in its distance study programs irrespective of changes in the institution’s
accreditation status. The institution should update the Teach-Out Commitment and
send it to the Commission when there are changes in the institution’s ownership,
management, or location. Institutions must also submit a Teach-Out Plan, if required.

D. NEW AND REVISED COURSES

The institution must inform the Commission whenever it adds or revises a
course/program.

E. CORRECT ANY INCORRECT OR MISLEADING INFORMATION

An accredited institution is required to issue public correction to all incorrect or
misleading information knowingly or unknowingly released in reference to its
accreditation status, the contents of reports of the examining committee from
accreditation-related visits, and/or any actions taken by the Commission with respect
to the institution.

F. MAINTAIN PROPER LICENSURES, AUTHORIZATIONS, OR APPROVALS

An accredited institution may not retain accreditation if it is not properly licensed,

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 140
 authorized, or approved by the applicable state educational oversight authority. Each
accredited institution must conform to all the provisions of applicable laws and
regulations.

G. ADVISE COMMISSION IN A TIMELY MANNER

An accredited institution must promptly inform the Commission of any actions it
plans to take itself or actions taken against it by other agencies if those actions could
affect its good status in the eyes of the Commission or the public, and resolve
complaints in a forthright, prompt, amicable, and equitable manner. Members should
make periodic contact with the staff of the Commission apprising them of
governmental and media actions which may affect their institutions or the
Commission.

H. ADVISE COMMISSION OF SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE

It is the duty of the Commission to make certain that any substantive change an
accredited institution makes does not adversely affect its capacity to continue to meet
DEAC’s accreditation standards. An institution must obtain the Commission’s
approval before the change in the institution’s scope of accreditation is granted.

I. PARTICIPATE IN ON-SITE EVALUATIONS

An institution should encourage its staff and faculty to actively participate in DEAC’s
accreditation process as one opportunity for professional development. The
Commission conducts training sessions through its online course entitled DEAC
Evaluator Training Program. Peer-reviewers receive instructions on being effective
evaluators.

J. RENEWAL OF ACCREDITATION
An accredited institution must take the steps necessary to renew its accreditation at
least every five years (three years following initial accreditation). After this time,
without affirmative action by the Commission to continue the renewal of an
institution’s accreditation, the accreditation expires as of the date determined by the
Commission. DEAC staff sends the institution a reminder to submit its application for
accreditation by the date specified. Once the institution is granted renewal of
accreditation, the DEAC staff issues a new accreditation certificate citing the original
date of accreditation and the renewal of accreditation date.

K. FAILURE TO MEET OBLIGATIONS

If at any time an institution fails to meet its obligations of accreditation in a timely
manner, including failure to pay its financial obligations to DEAC, the Commission
may order a special visit.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 141
VIII. DEAC CODE OF ETHICS FOR STUDENT RECRUITMENT PERSONNEL
A recruitment representative is someone who enrolls prospective students, including, but
not limited to, telephone marketers, enrollment advisors, and admission representatives.

A. As a student recruitment representative of an accredited distance education

institution, I recognize that I have certain responsibilities toward students, the
public, and my institution. To fulfill these responsibilities, I pledge adherence to
this Code of Ethics.

B. I will observe fully the accreditation standards, rules, policies, procedures, and
guidelines established by my institution, the Distance Education Accrediting
Commission, the state education agency, and other legally authorized agencies.

C. I will adhere to high ethical standards in the conduct of my work, and to the best
of my ability, will:

1. Observe fully the rights of all applicants and commit no action that would be
detrimental to any applicant’s opportunity to enroll because of race, sex, color,
creed, or national origin.

2. Never knowingly make any false or misleading representation to any applicant

or use any coercive practices in presenting information.

3. Enroll applicants only in the course or courses in which they have expressed
their interest, provided they meet the qualifications and standards established
by my institution for enrollment.

4. Provide applicants only with information authorized by my institution

regarding the occupational opportunities for graduates, and never make claims
guaranteeing employment, job promotion prospects, or income increases to an
applicant.

5. State accurately and clearly to prospective students the approvals,

accreditation, business and employer recognition, and course acceptance
accorded to my institution.

6. Provide only full and accurate information on the transferability of academic

credits and acceptance of degrees or credentials by other educational
institutions, and disclose affirmatively the fact that the acceptance of credits
and degrees is entirely the prerogative of the receiving institution and
acceptance cannot be guaranteed.

7. Provide prospective applicants only complete and accurate information on the

total financial obligation they will be incurring prior to accepting their
enrollment application.

8. Provide students prior to enrolling complete and accurate information about

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 142
 financing options for students, and answer any questions.

9. Never use tuition assistance available from a government agency or other

source as the primary inducement for enrollment.

10. Refrain at all times from making any statement or inference that might falsely
impugn the integrity or value of any other institution, method of training, or
profession.

11. Discharge faithfully, and to the best of my ability, all of the duties and
obligations and procedures established by my institution for my position and
know all of my obligations and obligations as an institutional representative.

12. Reflect at all times the highest credit upon myself, my institution, and the field
of distance education, and always strive to enhance the reputation of my
profession through my conduct as an institutional representative.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 143
IX. ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENT

A. Prospective students whose native language is not English and who have not earned a
degree from an appropriately accredited institution where English is the principal
language of instruction must demonstrate college-level proficiency in English through
one of the following for admission:

1. Undergraduate Degree: A minimum total score of 57 on the paper-delivered

Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL PBT), or 61 on the Internet
Based Test (iBT); 6.0 on the International English Language Test (IELTS); 44
on the Pearson Test of English Academic Score Report; 95 on the Duolingo
English Test; or 53 on the 4-skill Michigan English Test (MET), or 650/LP on
the Michigan Examination for the Certificate of Competency in English
(ECCE), or 650/LP on the Michigan Examination for the Certificate of
Proficiency in English (ECPE).

A high school diploma completed at an accredited/recognized high school

(where the medium of instruction is English).

2. Master’s Degree: A minimum total score of 60 on the paper-delivered Test of

English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL PBT), or 71 on the Internet Based
Test (iBT); 6.5 on the International English Language Test (IELTS); 50 on the
Pearson Test of English Academic Score Report; 100 on the Duolingo English
Test; or 55 on the 4-skill Michigan English Test (MET), or 650/LP on the
Michigan Examination for the Certificate of Competency in English (ECCE),
or 650/LP on the Michigan Examination for the Certificate of Proficiency in
English (ECPE).

3. First Professional Degree or Professional Doctoral Degree: A minimum

score of 65 on the paper-delivered Test of English as a Foreign Language
(TOEFL PBT), or 80 on the Internet Based Test (iBT); 6.5 on the International
English Language Test (IELTS); 58 on the Pearson Test of English Academic
Score Report; 105 on the Duolingo English Test; or 55 on the 4-skill Michigan
English Test (MET), or 650/LP on the Michigan Examination for the
Certificate of Competency in English (ECCE), or 650/LP on the Michigan
Examination for the Certificate of Proficiency in English (ECPE).

4. A minimum score on the College Board Accuplacer ESL Exam Series as

follows:

ESL Language Use: Score of 85

ESL Listening: Score of 80
ESL Reading: Score of 85
ESL Sentence Meaning: Score of 90
ESL Writeplacer: Score of 4
Comprehensive Score for all exams of 350

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 144
 5. A minimum grade of Pre-1 on the Eiken English Proficiency Exam;

6. A minimum B-2 English proficiency level identified within the Common

European Framework of Reference (CEFR) standards and assessed through
various ESOL examinations, including the University of Cambridge;

7. A transcript indicating completion of at least 30 semester credit hours with an

average grade of “C” or higher at an institution accredited by an agency
recognized by the United States Secretary of Education and/or the Council for
Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA), or accepted foreign equivalent that is
listed in the International Handbook of Universities where the language of
instruction was English. An average grade of B or higher is required for the
master’s degree, first professional degree, or professional doctoral degree.

B. Transcripts not in English must be evaluated by an appropriate third party and

translated into English or evaluated by a trained transcript evaluator fluent in the
language on the transcript. In this case, the evaluator must have expertise in the
educational practices of the country of origin and include an English translation of the
review.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 145
X. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT BENCHMARKS

The degree program benchmarks are set forth in the table below. DEAC is continuing with its
historical practice of setting graduation rate benchmarks at approximately 15 points below the
average for the total number of students in all institutions at each degree level. Data are collected
from DEAC-accredited institutions as a baseline for the use of empirical, quantitative measures of
institutional effectiveness and improvement strategies that focus on distance education. DEAC
reviews the data it receives each year in annual report submissions from accredited institutions to
determine if adjustments are needed. This practice is intended to accommodate both annual
fluctuations within institutions and variable factors across institutions and programs.

Average Graduation Rate Graduation Rate

Associate Degree Programs

Distance Education 47% 32%

Correspondence/Competency-Based 28% *
Bachelor’s Degree Programs 58% 43%
Master’s Degree Programs 69% 54%
First Professional Degree
77% 62%
Programs
Doctoral Degree Programs 55% 40%
*The Commission does not set a benchmark at 15 points below the average. However, it recognizes that different
factors could fairly account for an institution reporting a rate below the 28% average. Accordingly, with respect to
institutions reporting a lower rate, the Commission will conduct a secondary analysis of individual course completion
rates, evaluation of student portfolios, and other information that would reasonably demonstrate institutional
effectiveness.

Data on student persistence and completion in shorter-term, non-degree educational programs offered
at DEAC-accredited institutions are submitted and reviewed on an annual basis. Based upon a
longitudinal review of these data, DEAC continues to set a completion rate benchmark at 60 percent
for these programs.

Average Completion Rate Completion Rate

Non-degree Programs 80% 60%

DEAC values other quantifiable means of evaluating institutional effectiveness. Institutions may
provide data on their IPEDS outcomes measures, IPEDS graduation rates, or National Student
Clearinghouse Total Completion Rates in addition to data reported directly to the DEAC.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 146
XI. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND SATISFACTION
A. ACHIEVEMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
When an institution undergoes initial or renewal of accreditation, it must provide in its
Self-Evaluation Report (SER) both a formal written Outcomes Assessment Plan for
regularly conducting student learning outcomes assessments for all of its
courses/programs and documentation that it follows the plan. The institution’s
Outcomes Assessment Plan must also include documentation on how student learning
outcomes data is used to assess institutional outcomes, goals, and strategic initiatives.
Each accredited institution must confirm that it meets this requirement in its Annual
Report to the Commission and by providing a narrative on its continuous improvement
results.

The institution must demonstrate and document in its Self-Evaluation Report through
results of learning outcomes assessments that students achieve learning outcomes that
are appropriate to its mission and to the rigor and depth of the degrees or certificates
offered. The institution must also describe how its Outcomes Assessment Plan has
contributed to the improvement of the institution over time and explain how the plan
demonstrates that the institution is fulfilling its stated mission. The institution must
demonstrate that it uses evidence of student learning to gauge the effectiveness of the
educational practices and methodologies through its institutional effectiveness
planning efforts. This data should also be used to identify and implement strategies for
improving student learning. It is not enough for an institution to simply collect data.
The institution must demonstrate that the evidence is analyzed and drives curricular
and institutional improvements.

Assessment is an ongoing process aimed at understanding and improving student

learning. An institution’s Outcomes Assessment Plan should communicate 1) what the
institution wants students to be able to do or know, 2) how it knows the students
achieved these outcomes, and 3) how the institution will use the information received
to improve teaching and learning. An Outcomes Assessment Plan should begin with a
solid set of learning outcomes that are quantifiable, realistic, and measurable.

The institution’s Outcomes Assessment Plan should describe the different areas
assessed, the methods of assessment and when they are used, and how it interprets and
uses the results. The institution must use both direct and indirect measures of
outcomes learning assessments to show achievement of course and program outcomes,
and provide documented evidence that shows that the results are used to improve
programs, curricula, instruction, faculty development, and support services.

B. PERCEIVED STUDENT SATISFACTION

The institution documents that students are satisfied with the instructional and
educational services provided. DEAC evaluates student responses to survey questions
designed by the Commission as a part of the DEAC accreditation process. Students in
DEAC-accredited institutions fit a profile, and most are older and maintain other
personal and professional commitments. They are adequate judges of whether the

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 147
 program delivered what it promised. The institution should regularly survey students,
at a minimum annually, using questions designed to elicit the measure of satisfaction.
The institution should establish a baseline. The Commission developed three questions
to be asked randomly of students. For each course and program offered by an
institution, three of every four students responding to a random survey must answer
positively about their experiences.

C. PROGRESS THROUGH THE COURSE/PROGRAM

The institution documents that students complete their studies at rates that compare
favorably to those of courses/programs offered by similar DEAC-accredited
institutions or benchmarks set by the Commission. See Appendix X.

D. OTHER INFORMATION CONSIDERED

In determining whether an institution undergoing its initial or renewal of accreditation
meets Standard V. Student Achievement and Satisfaction, the Commission considers
the direct evidence of the results of its own survey of students using the DEAC
Student Survey Form. An institution must submit 100 names (labels for
correspondence institutions) with their application form. If an institution has more
than one division (e.g., vocational or academic degrees), it must submit 100 names
from each division.

The on-site evaluators and the Commission will review the student surveys to evaluate
the institution’s performance. The survey results from the Commission-administered
student survey will be compared to those of institution-administered surveys to
establish the validity of the institution’s survey results.

The Commission will also consider evidence from: 1) analysis of student complaints
received about the institution, 2) information solicited in a survey that the Commission
sends to state and federal agencies, consumer agencies, and Better Business Bureaus,
and 3) any other data or information it encounters about the institution, regardless of
its source.

If the institution feels that it cannot adequately and fairly fulfill the reporting
requirements as described above, it may suggest other ways of providing evidence that
it meets Standard V. Student Achievement and Satisfaction. The Commission will
make a determination on a case-by-case basis if the institution’s methods of providing
evidence are acceptable for meeting Standard V. Student Achievement and
Satisfaction.

E. COMMISSION’S REVIEW
The Commission will review the data supplied in the institution’s Annual Report and
will compare the completion and graduation rates with similar institutions offering
similar courses/programs and degree levels. To make the comparison, the DEAC staff
will determine which institutions and programs are similar. For institutions
undergoing initial or renewal of accreditation, the on-site evaluators and subject
specialists will review the information in the Self-Evaluation Report and make the
comparison with Commission-supplied data.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 148
 To be considered a “favorable comparison,” a course or program must not fall below
15 points of the mean completion rate for similar courses or programs for the
institution’s assigned peer group. The graduation rates for degree programs will be
compared with graduation rates for similar degree levels (e.g., associate, bachelor’s,
master’s, first professional, and professional doctorate).

If the Commission’s analysis does not show that the institution’s data compares
favorably with those of similar DEAC-accredited institutions, the institution must
provide a written explanation of its data and how they were gathered, and the
Commission will review the institution’s explanation and take whatever follow-up
action it deems appropriate. Such action may include 1) accepting the institution’s
explanations and taking no further action, 2) determining that the institution may no
longer offer the course/program in its present form, and/or 3) ordering the institution
to undergo a full reaccreditation review if the institution does not make the appropriate
changes.

F. ANNUAL REPORTING OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT RESULTS

The institution in its Annual Report is required to provide a narrative on its activities
or improvements which were made during the reporting year based directly on the
results of its outcomes assessment efforts. These institutional changes or
improvements can be minor or major, depending on the data collected.

G. CONCLUSION
The Commission will judge the acceptability of the case an institution makes for
meeting Standard V. Student Achievement and Satisfaction by reviewing all of the
evidence and the thoroughness, clarity, and adequacy of the documentation presented
in the Self-Evaluation Report and Annual Report.

When an institution is undergoing its initial accreditation or renewal of accreditation,

the on-site evaluators will review and evaluate the information provided by the
Commission and by the institution against the minimum levels of acceptance
described above. They will also determine if there are any extenuating circumstances
that should be considered in the case of an institution whose performance falls below
minimum acceptable levels.

If the Commission’s analysis shows that the institution’s outcomes data do not meet
the prescribed minimum acceptable levels, the institution must provide a written
explanation, and the Commission will review the institution’s explanation and take
whatever follow-up action it deems appropriate.

Evidence provided by the institution must be relevant, verifiable, representative, and

cumulative. It may not be modified to produce a desired outcome. The burden of proof
is always on the institution to provide evidence that it meets Standard V. Student
Achievement and Satisfaction.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 149
XII. PILOT PROGRAMS
The DEAC will consider suspension of certain policies and grant approval to a limited
number of applicants which propose innovative pilot programs that contribute to
strengthening the institution and its education and training and benefit its students. The
Commission may use the experience gained from such pilot projects to adjust and improve
its accrediting programs.

A. ELIGIBILITY
An applicant for a pilot program must be accredited by the DEAC. An applicant
for a pilot program must be an institution in good standing with DEAC, and its
proposed pilot program must also be in compliance with federal, state, and local
law.

B. APPLICATION
The Commission will consider an application for a pilot program in accordance
with the educational significance of the proposal and the potential for contribution
to the development of education and training and of accreditation standards. A
determination by the Commission not to accept an application for a pilot program
will be without prejudice to its resubmission at a later time or to the institution’s
current accredited status.

An applicant for a pilot program must submit the following:

1. A narrative statement demonstrating the applicant’s eligibility and

alignment with its mission and describing the pilot program in detail. This
narrative should indicate the specific accreditation standards for which a
waiver is requested. The narrative should include a description of the
specific objectives sought to be accomplished and an explanation of how
the pilot program will strengthen the institution, contribute to the
development of its education and training, and benefit students.

2. A statement of the length of time necessary to implement the pilot program

proposal and to assess its effectiveness. This statement should explain the
basis of the institution’s projections.

3. A demonstration that the faculty, instructional material, equipment, and

facilities that will be used in conjunction with the pilot program are
sufficient to meet the objectives of the proposal. This demonstration must
include staff and faculty personnel reports for all persons who will act in an
instructional or administrative capacity in the pilot program and a detailed
description of the instructional materials, equipment, and facilities that may
be used.

4. A projection of the number of students expected to enroll and complete the

training and the basis for the applicant’s projections.

5. An explanation of how the applicant will recruit and admit students, assure

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 150
 that students are fully and accurately informed about the education/training
to be provided, and determine that students have the capability to benefit
from and succeed at the education/training. The institution must
demonstrate that students’ health, safety, and welfare will be protected.

6. A plan that describes the funding for the pilot program and demonstrates
that the applicant is able to support and complete the pilot program.

7. A certification statement, signed by the applicant, that the information

included in the application for a pilot program is true and correct.

C. EVALUATION
Upon the receipt of the above information, the Commission will require an on-site
visit to verify the information supplied and to develop a further understanding of
the pilot program. The findings of the evaluator(s) will be set forth in a report that
will be provided to the applicant and the Commission. The applicant will have the
opportunity to respond to the report.

D. COMMISSION REVIEW
Upon consideration of the information provided, the findings and assessment
described in “Evaluation” above, and the applicant’s response to the findings, the
Commission may grant approval for the proposed pilot program if it finds that the
program can be reasonably expected to strengthen the institution and its education
and training and benefit its students. The Commission reserves the right to limit
the duration of the pilot program and the number of students who will be allowed
to participate. The Commission may establish such other terms and conditions
upon any approval granted under the pilot program as it deems appropriate. The
Commission will establish an appropriate fee to cover the costs associated with
each pilot program.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 151
XIII. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WARRANT WAIVERS OF DEAC
STANDARDS & PROCEDURES
The Distance Education Accrediting Commission reserves the right to grant waivers of its
standards, policies, procedures and timeframes when special circumstances warrant such
waivers, for a period of time as determined by DEAC annually, and not to exceed three
years unless DEAC determines there is good cause to extend the period of time, and if—
A. DEAC and the institution can show that the circumstances requiring the period of
noncompliance are beyond the institution's control, such as—

1. A natural disaster or other catastrophic event significantly impacting an

institution's or program's operations.
2. Accepting students from another institution that is implementing a
teach-out or closing.
3. Significant and documented local or national economic changes, such
as an economic recession or closure of a large local employer.
4. Changes relating to State licensure requirements.
5. The normal application of the agency's standards creates an undue
hardship on students, or
6. Instructors who do not meet the agency's typical faculty standards, but
who are otherwise qualified by education or work experience, to teach
courses within a dual or concurrent enrollment program, as defined in 20
U.S.C. 7801, or career and technical education courses.

B. The grant of the period of noncompliance is approved by DEAC’s decision-

making body,

C. DEAC projects that the institution or program has the resources necessary to
achieve compliance with the standard, policy, or procedure postponed within the
time allotted,
and

D. The institution or program demonstrates to the satisfaction of DEAC that the

period of noncompliance will not—

1. Contribute to the cost of the program to the student without the student's
consent;
2. Create any undue hardship on, or harm to, students; or
3. Compromise the program's academic quality.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 152
GLOSSARY

ACADEMIC
A member of an institution of learning, relating to education and scholarship.

ACADEMIC PROGRAM
A series of courses designed to lead to a degree, diploma, or certificate credential in a defined
field of study or occupation. Academic programs are guided by specific program outcomes.

ACCEPTED BEST PRACTICE

A technique or methodology that, through experience and research, has been proven to
reliably lead to a desired or optimum result within an industry or profession.

ACCREDITATION
A voluntary, nongovernmental, peer-based form of quality assurance at the institutional level.
Institutions demonstrate compliance with state, federal, and accreditation standards
determined through initial and periodic evaluations in order to achieve accreditation.

ACRONYMS (COMMONLY USED IN HIGHER EDUCATION)

AACRAO American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admission Officers

AA Associate of Arts degree
AAS Associate of Applied Science degree
AS Associate of Science degree
BA Bachelor of Arts degree
BS Bachelor of Science degree
BSN Bachelor of Science in Nursing degree
CAEL Council for Adult and Experiential Learning
CEU Continuing Education Unit
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CHEA Council for Higher Education Accreditation
CLEP College Level Examination Program
DA Doctor of Arts degree (specified fields)
DBA Doctor of Business Administration
DMin Doctor of Ministry
DPA Doctor of Public Administration
DPT Doctor of Physical Therapy
DOT Doctor of Occupational Therapy
DSc Doctor of Science (specified fields)
EdD Doctor of Education degree
FAFSA Free Application for Federal Student Aid
GED General Education Development
GPA Grade Point Average

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 153
IPEDS Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System
MA Master of Arts degree
MBA Master of Business Administration degree
MS Master of Science degree
NACIQI National Advisory Committee for Institutional Quality and Integrity
NCSARA National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements
TOEFL Test of English as a Foreign Language
USED United States Department of Education

ACTIVE STUDENT
An enrolled student who has completed at least one assignment or examination, is
making satisfactory progress, or has affirmed in writing an intent to continue studying.

ADDITIONAL LOCATION
Per Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 34 §602: a facility that is geographically apart
from the main campus of the institution and at which the institution offers at least 50
percent of a program and may qualify as a branch campus.

ADMINISTRATIVE SITE
A separate office located geographically apart from the main headquarters location,
which typically provides an off-site workplace for the convenience of institution officials
who do not live near the headquarters. Neither educational programs nor instructional
services to students are offered from an administrative site.

ADMINISTRATOR
An individual who manages an institution of learning.

ASSESSMENT (OF STUDENT LEARNING)

An ongoing, iterative process consisting of defining learning outcomes, choosing a
method or approach, gathering evidence of learning, analyzing and interpreting the
evidence, and using the results to improve student learning.

ASSIGNMENT
A specific task or amount of work performed by a student and submitted for evaluation.

ARTICULATION AGREEMENTS
Cooperation between two or more institutions to facilitate the transfer of students’ credit
or other predetermined collaboration.

ASYNCHRONOUS
Instructional communication or interaction that does not occur at the same time, place, or
rate.

AVOCATIONAL
Courses or programs designed for personal academic enhancement or professional
development.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 154
BENCHMARK
A point of reference or standard in relation to which something can be compared and
judged. A specific level of student performance may serve as the benchmark that students
are expected to meet at a particular point in time or developmental level. Retention and
graduation rates may also be benchmarked against those of peer institutions or national
norms.

BRANCH CAMPUS
Per Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 34 §602: an additional location of an institution
that is geographically apart and independent of the main campus of the institution. The
Secretary considers a location of an institution to be independent of the main campus if
the location (1) Is permanent in nature; (2) Offers courses in educational programs
leading to a degree, certificate, or other recognized educational credential; (3) Has its
own faculty and administrative or supervisory organization; and (4) Has its own
budgetary and hiring authority.

CANCELLATION
The process of withdrawing a student, refunding tuition and fees owed to the student, and
relieving the student and institution of further obligations.

CAPSTONE
A culminating project or experience, usually associated with undergraduate and graduate
education, that generally takes place in the student’s final year of study and requires
review, synthesis, and application of what has been learned over the course of the
student’s instructional experience. The result may be a report, product, or performance.
The capstone can provide evidence for assessment of a range of outcomes (e.g., core
competencies, program outcomes, institution-level outcomes).

CERTIFICATE PROGRAM
Degree: Typically, certificate programs contain a collection of credit-bearing courses
configured to equip students with specialized knowledge in a subject area with content
that is less extensive than what is provided in an entire degree program.
Non-Degree: Certificate/diploma programs consist of modules or lessons that result in the
award of a “certificate” or “diploma” at the completion of a course of study.

CHANGE IN LEGAL STATUS

A change in the legal definition of the company or corporation, which is typically defined
by the state or United States government, such as changing from a for-profit to a
nonprofit or from an S Corporation to an LLC.

CHANGE OF FORM OF CONTROL

The sale of all or a majority interest of the institution’s assets, sale or assignment of the
controlling interest of the voting stock of a corporation that owns the institution or that
controls the institution through one or more subsidiaries, merger or consolidation of the
institution with other institutions, or an independent corporation with a different

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 155
ownership. When an institution changes its form of control, defined as the ability to direct
or cause the direction of the actions of an institution, it is essentially changing ownership.

CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP
Any transaction or combination of transactions that would result in a change in the
control of an accredited institution.

CIP CODES
The Classification of Instructional Programs provides a taxonomic scheme that supports
the accurate tracking and reporting of fields of study and program completions activity.

CLOCK HOUR
One instructional hour defined as 50 minutes of instruction in a 60-minute period.

COMPETENCY
In assessment of student learning, a specific skill, body of knowledge, or disposition; can
also refer to the student’s ability to demonstrate that learning.

COMPLETION
Signifies a student met the requirements for an individual course, semester, or term.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
For purposes of this policy, a person with a conflict of interest is referred to as an
“interested person.” The following circumstances shall be deemed to create a conflict of
interest:

Ownership of some or all of an institution, its assets, or the stock of the company
that owns or operates the institution;
The holding of mortgages, liens, or other debt instruments or interest upon an
institution or its assets;
Having been employed, or currently employed, at the institution;
Currently employed with a DEAC institution that competes with the institution;
Having served, or currently serving, as a consultant to the institution;
Having served, or currently serving, on a board, advisory council, or committee of
the institution;
Having attended the institution as a student;
Having financial interest (including holding stocks, etc.) in the institution or a
business or enterprise that competes with DEAC;
Having a close personal friend or family member at the institution; or
Having accepted gifts, entertainment or other favors from individuals or entities
(see below).

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 156
Other situations may create the appearance of a conflict, or present a duality of interests
in connection with a person who has influence over the activities or finances of the
DEAC.

CONTINUING EDUCATION UNITS (CEU)

A measurement of participation in non-credit professional development activities.

CORRESPONDENCE EDUCATION
Education provided through one or more courses in which the institution provides
instructional materials and examinations by mail or electronic transmission to students
who are separated from the instructor. Interaction between the instructor and the student
is not regular and substantive, and it is primarily initiated by the student. Correspondence
courses are typically self-paced. Correspondence education is not distance education for
the purposes of participating in Federal Student Assistance Title IV funding programs.

COURSE
A learning experience of defined scope and duration, with intended learning outcomes, as
described in a catalog or syllabus.

CREDIT HOURS
Semester and quarter hours are equivalent to the commonly accepted and traditionally
defined units of academic measurement. Academic degrees or academic credit-bearing
distance education courses are measured by the learning outcomes normally achieved
through 45 hours of student work for one semester credit1 or 30 hours of student work for
one quarter credit2.
1
One credit/semester hour is 15 hours of academic engagement and 30 hours of preparation.
2
One quarter hour credit is 10 hours of academic engagement and 20 hours of preparation.

CURRICULUM
Lessons, outcomes, and academic content taught in a specific course of study or
academic program.

DEGREE
A title conferred on students by an institution on completion of a program of study.

DIPLOMA
A document bearing record of graduation from or of a degree conferred by an educational
institution.

DISTANCE EDUCATION
The U.S. Department of Education defines distance education within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) 34 § 600.2. as follows:

Education that uses one or more of the technologies listed in paragraphs (1) through
(4) of this definition to deliver instruction to students who are separated from the
instructor or instructors, and to support regular and substantive interaction between

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 157
 the students and the instructor or instructors, either synchronously or
asynchronously.
The technologies that may be used to offer distance education include —
1. The internet;
2. One-way and two-way transmissions through open broadcast, closed circuit,
cable, microwave, broadband lines, fiber optics, satellite, or wireless
communications devices;
3. Audio conferencing; or
4. Other media used in a course in conjunction with any of the technologies listed
in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this definition.

For purposes of this definition, an instructor is an individual responsible for

delivering course content and who meets the qualifications for instruction established
by the institution’s accrediting agency.

For purposes of this definition, substantive interaction is engaging students in

teaching, learning, and assessment, consistent with the content under discussion, and
also includes at least two of the following—
1. Providing direct instruction;
2. Assessing or providing feedback on a student’s coursework;
3. Providing information or responding to questions about the content of a course
or competency;
4. Facilitating a group discussion regarding the content of a course or competency;
or,
5. Other instructional activities approved by the institution’s or program’s
accrediting agency.

An institution ensures regular interaction between a student and an instructor or

instructors by, prior to the student’s completion of a course or competency—

1. Providing the opportunity for substantive interactions with the student on a

predictable and regular basis commensurate with the length of time and the amount
of content in the course or competency; and
2. Monitoring the student’s academic engagement and success and ensuring that
an instructor is responsible for promptly and proactively engaging in
substantive interaction with the student when needed, on the basis of such
monitoring, or upon request by the student.

DIVISION
Any name used by an institution to advertise its various courses or programs. A
“division” is owned and operated by the parent institution and is not a separate legal
entity.

DROP OUT
A student who withdraws or ceases attendance at an institution.

EDUCATIONAL OFFERINGS
Academic or vocational courses or programs.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 158
EDUCATIONAL RECORDS
Records that contain information directly related to a student and are maintained by an
educational institution in accordance with applicable state and federal rules and
regulations.

ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE
Symbols or other data in digital form attached to an electronically transmitted document
as verification of the sender’s intent to sign the document.

ENROLLMENT AGREEMENT (APPLICATION, CONTRACT)

Any agreement or other similar contractual document that creates or evidences an
obligation binding a student to purchase educational offerings from an institution.

EXHIBITS
The required data, evidence, documents, and other items that are included as part of the
Self-Evaluation Report and reviewed during initial and renewal of accreditation.

FACULTY
Instructional staff of an institution responsible for the design, delivery, and assessment of
academic programs. The use of “faculty” does not typically include administrators,
counselors, or other campus educators, (e.g., admissions representatives, student service
personnel). Full-time faculty members are those whose primary employment obligation is
to teaching and research at the institution. Part-time or adjunct faculty members may have
continuing contracts and be involved in program development and review, governance,
and other matters; or they may be assigned a specific number of courses with few or no
other responsibilities to the institution. The institution is responsible for having clear
policies on faculty roles and responsibilities.

FICE CODE
The six-digit institutional identifier that is assigned to each higher education (two-year or
above) institution by the Federal Interagency Committee on Education and is used in all
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) reports.

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
At a minimum, the financial statements (audited or reviewed) must be comparative,
include a letter of financial statement validation, CPA Opinion or Review Report, and
also include the following

FOR-PROFIT INSTITUTIONS:
Balance Sheet: reflecting assets, liabilities, and equity;
Income Statement: reflecting revenues, expenses, and net income (loss);
Statement of Cash Flows: reflecting the sources and uses of cash;
Statement of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity: showing activity in
shareholders’ equity for the periods presented; and

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 159
 Explanatory Notes: reflects all of the disclosures or footnotes required by
generally accepted accounting principles.

NONPROFIT INSTITUTIONS:
Statement of Financial Position: reflecting assets, liabilities, and net
assets;
Statement of Activities: reflecting revenues, expenses, and change in net
assets;
Statement of Cash Flows: reflecting the sources and uses of cash;
Explanatory Notes: reflects all of the disclosures or footnotes required by
generally accepted accounting principles.

FIRST PROFESSIONAL DEGREE

A degree that signifies both completion of the academic requirement for beginning
practice in a given profession and a level of professional skill beyond that normally
required for a bachelor’s degree. This degree usually is based on a program requiring at
least two academic years of work before entrance and a total of at least six academic
years of work to complete the degree program, including both prior required college work
and the professional program itself. By the National Center for Education Statistics
definition, “First Professional degrees are awarded in the fields of dentistry (D.D.S. or
D.M.D.), medicine (M.D.), optometry (O.D.), osteopathic medicine (D.O.), pharmacy
(D.Phar.), pediatric medicine (D.P.M.), veterinary medicine (D.V.M.), chiropractic (D.C.
or D.C.M.), law (LL.B. or J.D.) and theological professionals (M.Div. or M.H.L.).”

GOOD CAUSE
The Commission may, in its sole discretion and upon written request of an institution
providing detailed grounds for its request, agree to extend the Deferral Period or Show
Cause Remediation Period, as applicable, for good cause shown. An institution
requesting an extension must provide evidence, in its request, that it has made substantial,
good faith progress toward compliance with the requirements of the deferral notice or
show cause directive and that granting the extension will not impose an unreasonable
burden on or otherwise cause harm to students. A “good cause” extension may be
allowed, for example, when an institution needs additional time to more fully document
the scope and permanence of its compliance with DEAC accreditation standards or to
establish an extended history of such compliance. A decision to grant a “good cause”
extension may be made contingent on the institution’s submission of interim reports on
progress and related data. When the Commission grants a “good cause” extension, the
time allowed for institutional compliance may exceed the permissible compliance times
published in federal regulations. If the result of a “good cause” extension results in a
Show Cause Remediation Period longer than that authorized by federal regulation, the
Commission notifies the U.S. Secretary of Education of its decision and the reason for the
same. A decision by the Commission not to grant a “good cause” extension is not
appealable.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 160
GRADING CRITERIA
A set of criteria and standards linked to outcomes that are used to assess a student’s
performance on assignments, assessments, or examinations. Rubrics are used by faculty
in fairly and consistently measuring student performance.

GRADUATE
A student who has satisfied the prescribed requirements and been awarded a certificate,
diploma, or degree.

GRADUATION
The act of successful completion of all program requirements resulting in receipt of a
diploma or degree from an institution.

HYBRID COURSE
Instruction that combines face-to-face teaching and learning activities with distance
education.

IN-RESIDENCE COMPONENT
Instruction that requires in-person delivery of curriculum, learning of certain manual
skills, technical proficiency with specialized equipment, access to resources or the
application of certain techniques under professional supervision. In-residence
components must not exceed 49% of a DEAC-approved program.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

Intellectual property rights are the rights given to persons over the creations of their
minds. They usually give the creator an exclusive right over the use of his/her creation for
a certain period of time. There are four types of intellectual property: patents, trademarks,
copyrights, and trade secrets. For DEAC’s purposes, institutions should have a policy on
intellectual property rights as it relates to the creation of its courses/programs (including
lectures, audio and visual materials, and pictorial or graphic works), websites, and
software and databases. The institution’s published policy should resolve any questions
about who owns the copyright(s). The policy should be inclusive of faculty, staff, and
students.

INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS
An ongoing, cyclical process by which the institution assesses its administrative
operations, support services, educational offerings, and facilities by gathering, analyzing,
and using data on these areas to determine how well it is accomplishing its mission,
goals, and outcomes against defined benchmarks. This planning process is used to inform
decisions and continuous improvements efforts based on assessment results. Institutional
effectiveness is a comprehensive roadmap used to measure continuous improvement at
the institutional level. Outcomes assessment contributes to this process by measuring
course/program-level effectiveness through students’ achievement of learning outcomes.
Data and results gathered from the institutional effectiveness planning process are used to
inform strategic planning that is monitored annually and reviewed and revised during
regular intervals.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 161
INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH
A collection of institutional metrics and data useful for analysis, planning, improvement,
and accreditation review.

INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
Resources that make up the curriculum, such as textbooks, computer applications, links,
kits, supplies used throughout an academic or vocational course or program.

INTERNATIONAL CONTRACT
A formal agreement between a U.S. entity and a non-U.S. entity. For DEAC purposes,
whenever any major function of an institution (training sites, recruiting, instruction,
marketing, administrative functions) is performed outside the United States, or when
campuses or coordinating offices are opened in another country, an institution must have
a formal contract with the non-U.S. entity. Also, when the institution contracts with
foreign agents or educational entities, including formal articulation agreements, the
DEAC institution must submit to the Commission in writing a complete description of
the international program and activities and must submit its contracts for review

INTERNATIONAL HANDBOOK OF UNIVERSITIES

A handbook published by the International Association of Universities, which lists
institutions that are accepted as foreign equivalents to U.S. institutions accredited by
agencies recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education and/or the Council for Higher
Education Accreditation (CHEA).

(The International Handbook of Universities. 29th ed. IAU ISBN: 978-92-9002-207-7.

Cham Switzerland: International Association of Universities; November 2019. Palgrave
Macmillan htpps://doi.org/10.1057/978-3-319-76971-4 (eBook))

JOB PLACEMENT
An alumni service offered by an institution in which assistance is provided to graduates
in finding opportunities for a new career position. Placement is further defined to
describe when a graduate obtains employment as a direct result of the training, skills, or
education the graduate received from the institution. The employment must be for a
reasonable period of time, based on published program outcomes, and be considered
sustainable (e.g., not a single day of employment). The employment must be directly
related to the program from which the individual graduated, align with a majority of the
educational and training outcomes of the program completed, and be a paid position.

LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (LMS)

A platform or software application for the administration and management of online
distance education courses, activities, and resources.

LIBRARY RESOURCES
An accessible collection of texts, literary materials, reference books, manuscripts,
periodicals, videos, and audio materials that are maintained or provided by an institution.
The “library” can include both print and non-print materials and generally make use of a
variety of dispersed electronic digital databases. The accredited degree-awarding

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 162
institution is expected to have—or to provide learners ready access to—a reasonably rich
array of supplemental information resources that are related to and enhance the content of
the subject matter offered to students.

MAIN FACILITY
A geographic location that houses the headquarters of an institution. The institution
provides evidence it is approved in the state for the activity that it conducts at the
location.

MISSION
An institution’s formally adopted statement of its fundamental reasons for existence, its
shared purposes and values, and the students that it aims to serve. The mission is central
to decisions about priorities and strategic initiatives and provides a context for DEAC
decisions about quality and accreditation.

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)

A bilateral or multilateral agreement between two or more parties. It expresses a
convergence of wills between the parties, indicating an intended common line of action.
It is often used in cases where parties either do not imply a legal commitment or in
situations where the parties cannot create a legally enforceable agreement. In private U.S.
law, MOU is a common synonym for a letter of intent.

NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A process for determining and addressing needs or “gaps” between current conditions
and desired conditions, often used for improvement in individuals, education/training,
organizations, or communities (e.g. expected career or learning outcomes). An institution
should complete a “needs assessment” before developing a new program. The curriculum
development team should research and compare similar in-residence and distance
education programs. The needs assessment should assess industry trends, knowledge, and
competencies required for the field of study, professional organizations related to the
field, obstacles to success in the field, the demand and pay for the field, adaptability of
the topic to distance education, and availability of job opportunities, if applicable.

OBJECTIVES
Inputs that describe what the institution teaches students as a result of the curriculum
offered. They describe the intended results of instruction planned by the institution. Data
collected as a result of objectives communicates to all stakeholders the level of
curriculum rigor being taught and assessed.

ON-SITE EVALUATORS
Individuals who are trained by DEAC to serve on an on-site team or as a reader/reviewer
of Self-Evaluation Reports, exhibits, or other documents requested by DEAC. On-site
evaluators may represent the public or serve at a DEAC-accredited institutions as
presidents, provosts, deans, directors, or faculty but may also be subject matter experts in
education.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 163
OPE ID
Identification number used by the United States Department of Education Office of
Postsecondary Education to identify institutions that have Program Participation
Agreements so that their students are eligible to participate in Federal Student Assistance
programs under Title IV regulations. This is a six-digit number followed by a two-digit
suffix used to identify branches, additional locations, and other entities that are part of the
eligible institution.

OUTCOME
Outputs demonstrated by students as a result of the curriculum offered. They reflect the
actual achieved results of what was learned and provide evidence that intended learning
was achieved. Data collected as a result of outcomes communicate to all stakeholders the
level of student learning achieved.

PRIOR LEARNING
Learning that has occurred outside the classroom. In some cases, credit may be awarded
for prior learning through various means of assessment. An institution offering credit for
prior learning assessment publishes and follows evaluation standards consistent with
CAEL’s Ten Standards for Assessing Learning. Prior learning assessment is performed
by qualified individuals with experience in prior learning evaluation.

PROCTOR
A person who administers or supervises the testing process. The proctor verifies that the
person taking the examination is who he/she says he/she is by reviewing appropriate
documentation (i.e., driver’s license or government-issued identification with photo).

PROFESSIONAL DOCTORAL DEGREE

A post-master’s graduate-level degree that prepares individuals through internships,
practical application of training, and/or specialized certifications for professional practice
(such as the Doctor of Business Administration), as opposed to research methodologies
that are associated with academic doctoral degrees (such as the Doctor of Philosophy).

PROGRAM GOAL
A short, concise, general statement of the overall purpose of a program. A program goal
should point towards some long-term effect, change, or purpose. It is usually not phrased
in quantified terms. It should be sufficiently “definite” that it points clearly to the
program.

READING LEVEL
The level of a person’s reading comprehension as assessed by a standardized test or that
equivalent level at which a program of study is written.

RECRUITING PERSONNEL
Any administrators, staff, faculty, or contractors who enroll prospective students.

REMEDIAL INSTRUCTION

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 164
Instruction designed and delivered to assist students in order to achieve expected
competencies in core academic skills such as literacy and numeracy.

RESEARCH
Collection, analysis, and publication of data, studies, or other findings in order to expand
a field of knowledge or its application.

RUBRIC
A tool for scoring student work or performances, typically in the form of a table or
matrix, with criteria that describe the dimensions of the outcome and levels of
performance. The work or performance may be given an overall score (holistic scoring),
or criteria may be scored individually (analytic scoring). Rubrics are also used to
communicate expectations to students.

SELF-EVALUATION
The process of self-evaluation provides a institution an opportunity to critically reflect on
its operations, processes, and procedures at regular intervals and provides the on-site
team with a comprehensive review of the institution, its mission, and its processes that
are integral to delivering quality distance education.

SELF-EVALUATION REPORT
The Self-Evaluation Report is a guide that institutions use to communicate how their
policies and procedures meet or exceed DEAC accreditation standards.

SHOW CAUSE DIRECTIVE

The Commission may direct the institution to Show Cause as to why its accreditation
should not be withdrawn when substantive questions and concerns are raised regarding a
DEAC-accredited institution’s compliance with DEAC’s accreditation standards or
procedures. The issuance of a Show Cause directive is not an adverse action but a
statement of serious concern by the Commission. The burden of proof rests with the
institution to demonstrate that it is meeting DEAC’s accreditation standards and
procedures. Notice of the Show Cause directive is provided to federal and state agencies
with jurisdiction over the institution and to the public.

SOUND PRINCIPLES OF LEARNING

Theory and research-based fundamentals designed to promote effective learning
strategies.

SPECIAL VISIT
A focused visit that may be requested by the Commission to follow up on a specific area
of concern.

STRATEGIC PLANNING
The integrated planning that links the mission, priorities, people, and institutional
operations in a flexible system of evaluation, decision-making, and action. Strategic
planning shapes and guides the entire institution as it evolves over time and within its
educational community. Strategic planning is critical to institutions’ success, and even

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 165
long-term survival, within higher education. As the competition in distance education
continues to increase, it is important that institutions participate in a dynamic and
continuous strategic planning process. The strategic planning process provides
institutions with the structure needed to achieve their mission while identifying and
committing the resources necessary to achieve strategic initiatives. The process allows
institutions to objectively evaluate and plan for challenges and threats while maximizing
opportunities and enhancing strengths.

STUDENT INTEGRITY
Involves the enforcement of specific, published rules concerning academic honesty
(student cheating, plagiarism, or dishonesty in any form) and personal conduct that is
above reproach. Student integrity is best promoted by the implementation of a published
honor code or honor system, which is a set of rules or principles governing an academic
community based on a set of ideals that constitute honorable behavior within that
community. The use of an honor code depends on the idea that people (at least within the
community) can be trusted to act honorably. Those who are in violation of the honor code
can be subject to various sanctions, including academic dismissal and expulsion from the
institution. Student honor codes require all students to agree to them, and they often
require students to report any violations of the code of which they have personal
knowledge. A DEAC institution promotes an academic environment suitable for distance
or online delivery where students are encouraged to act with professional, academic, and
personal integrity. The institution must hold students personally accountable for
upholding the institution’s stated expectations for conduct.

STUDENT SATISFACTION
Evidence that documents students are satisfied with the instructional and educational
services provided.

STUDENT SERVICES
Resources provided for students by an institution. These services are designed to
proactively support students to perform to their potential, motivate students to study, or
respond to students’ questions of a nonacademic nature.

SUBJECT SPECIALIST
A person whose background, education, training, experience, occupation, and/or
profession qualifies him/her as a reliable authority or expert in a specific field of study
and who is appointed by DEAC to evaluate distance education courses/programs in terms
of the published standards for accredited institutions.

SYNCHRONOUS
Instructional communication or interaction that exists or occurs at the same time.

TEACH-OUT PLAN
Institutions develop a formal plan, approved by the Commission, that enables currently
enrolled students to complete their educational offerings at either the same or another
institution. During a “teach-out,” students are entitled to receive all instruction, services,

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 166
and materials consistent with the signed enrollment agreement or other similar
contractual document.

TERMINAL DEGREE
The highest academic or professional degree awarded in a specific field of study.
Generally, doctoral degrees and master’s degrees in specialized fields are considered
terminal degrees.

TOTAL COURSE PRICE

Includes tuition, fees, educational services and instruction, any other services (such as
proctored examinations or placement); any required books, kits, and equipment; any
optional or required resident training; and charges applied to all students, such as
application fees, registration fees, and finance charges. Institutions will use Total Course
Price in preparing enrollment agreements, calculating refund amounts, and collecting
student accounts.

TRANSCRIPT
An official copy of a student’s educational record at an educational institution. It usually
lists all courses taken, final grades received, credits (and honors) earned, and degrees or
certificates awarded, including corresponding dates of enrollment and completion.

Distance Education Accrediting Commission, 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 808, Washington, DC 20036

Page 167