Follow-Up Team Report

Cuesta College P. O. Box 8106 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8106

A Confidential Report Prepared for the Accrediting Commission For Community and Junior Colleges

This report represents the findings of the evaluation team that visited

Cuesta College on November 5, 2013

Dr. Ral Rodrguez, Chancellor Rancho Santiago Community College District, Chairperson

Cuesta College Team Roster

Dr. Ral Rodrguez (Chair) Chancellor Rancho Santiago Community College District

Dr. Lisa Conyers Former Vice President, Educational Services & Current Associate Professor of Spanish Moreno Valley College

INTRODUCTION AND RECENT ACCREDITATION HISTORY The San Luis Obispo County Community College District (SLOCCCD) is a public, single college community college district. The district primarily consists of the main campus of Cuesta College, which is located on the outskirts of the city of San Luis Obispo, the North County Campus in Paso Robles, and the South County Center in Arroyo Grande. The college district is governed by a five member Board of Trustees. The last comprehensive accreditation visit to Cuesta College occurred in October 2008. A ten-member team visited the college from October 13-16, 2008 for the purpose of determining the colleges status in meeting the Accreditation Standards of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, Western Association of Schools and Colleges. The 2008 evaluation team submitted a report to the Commission and the Commission acted to issue Warning and required that Cuesta College correct the deficiencies noted. The college was required to complete a Follow-Up Report in October 2009 followed by a visit of Commission representatives on Recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 provided by the team and contained in the Commissions February 2009 action letter. A two-member team visited Cuesta College on October 27, 2009 to assure that the recommendations made by the team during the October 2008 visit were addressed by the institution. The team submitted a report to the Commission regarding their findings and recommendations and the Commission acted to impose Probation and directed Cuesta College to correct the deficiencies noted and to resolve Recommendations 2, 5, 7, 8, and 9, and address the deficiency in meeting Eligibility Requirement (ER) 5. The college was required to complete a Follow-Up Report in October 2010 followed by a visit of Commission representatives. On November 5, 2010 a two-member team visited Cuesta College to assure that the recommendations made by the team during the October 2008 visit were addressed by the institution. The team submitted a report to the Commission regarding their findings and recommendations and the Commission acted to continue the college on Probation and require the college to complete a Follow-Up Report in conjunction with the colleges Mid-Term Report by October 15, 2011 followed by a visit of Commission representatives. The college was to demonstrate it had addressed Recommendations 2, 6, 7, and ER 5. A two-member team visited Cuesta College on November 10, 2011 to assure that the recommendations made by the team during the October 2008 visit were addressed by the institution. The team submitted a report to the Commission regarding their findings and recommendations and the Commission acted to order Show Cause and required the college to submit a Show Cause Report by October 15, 2012 followed by a visit of Commission representatives. Cuesta College was put on Show Cause because three of the nine deficiencies identified by the 2008 comprehensive evaluation team (Recommendations 2, 6, and 7) were not resolved by the institution and were again identified as deficiencies by the 2011 team. In addition, the college was found to be out

of compliance with Eligibility Requirement #19, Institutional Planning and Evaluation. The college was further directed by the Commission to demonstrate compliance with Standard IB, Standard IIIC, and Standard IIID. A six-member show cause team visited Cuesta College on October 28-29, 2012 to determine whether Cuesta College had made the changes and improvements requested by the Commission and whether the college now met the Accreditation Standards at a level sufficient to remain accredited. The team submitted an evaluation report and the Commission acted to remove Show Cause, issue Warning, and require Cuesta College to submit a Follow-Up Report by October 15, 2013 focused on Eligibility Requirement 19 and Recommendation 2. A two-member team visited Cuesta College on November 5, 2013 for the purpose of verifying whether the college had completed an entire cycle of planning and assessment and determining if the college now fully meets all of the Eligibility Requirements and Accreditation Standards. Toward that end, the team reviewed a number of evidence documents through the colleges web site and in person in the team room. The team also interviewed a broad cross section of the college community, including representatives of key committees and college officials, to verify the information contained in the FollowUp Report. The team appreciates the warm reception and open manner with which the college community welcomed and interacted with the team. The following report represents the teams observations, review of evidence, analysis, and conclusions pertaining to Eligibility Requirement 19 and Recommendation 2.

EVALUATION FINDINGS Eligibility Requirement 19: Institutional Planning and Evaluation The institution systematically evaluates and makes public how well and in what ways it is accomplishing its purposes, including assessment of student learning outcomes. The institution provides evidence of planning for improvement of institutional structures and processes, student achievement of educational goals, and student learning. The institution assesses progress toward achieving its stated goals and makes decisions regarding improvement through an ongoing and systematic cycle of evaluation, integrated planning, resource allocation, implementation, and re-evaluation. Observations: The college has developed a planning model that is complete, comprehensive, and integrated. The details of the planning model are described in the Integrated Planning Manual 2013. In this model, the college considers its mission, reviews demographic and trend data, links together several types of plans, evaluates effectiveness data, and uses that information to allocate resources and make improvements to the planning process.

Evidence and Analysis: When the 2012 Show Cause Evaluation Team visited the college, Cuesta College had just implemented a new planning model and completed all of the major plans that are required in the integrated planning model. However, the college had not yet completed a full annual cycle of the new planning model. Essentially, what was missing was evidence to support the feedback loop portion of the planning model, which pertains primarily to documenting evidence related to program improvement and the effectiveness of the planning process. The team verified that the college has implemented a process to examine Comprehensive Program Planning and Review documents on an annual basis. These documents are reviewed by the Institutional Effectiveness Committee and that committee produces a summary report. In addition, the report is submitted to the superintendent/presidents cabinet for review and action. (Standard I.B.2 and I.B.3) The team verified that the college is conducting annual reviews of learning outcomes. The college conducted a survey that was sent to all students who earned a degree at the college for the purpose of assessing the colleges Institutional Learning Outcomes. (Standard I.B.1) The results of the survey were provided to the Institutional Effectiveness Committee and a summary report with recommendations was distributed. (Standard I.B.3) In terms of other Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) assessments, the college incorporates the results of such assessments into its Comprehensive Program Planning and Review documents, which, again, are reviewed by the Institutional Effectiveness Committee. (Standard I.B.1, I.B.2, and I.B.3) The college has also passed proposals by the Academic Senate that they are in the process of implementing. The first proposal concerns a request to all faculty members to submit updated course and program assessments to a folder on a shared electronic site that any faculty member can access. The second proposal is for faculty members from specific programs to submit plans for direct assessment of Student Learning Outcomes that will then be reviewed by the Student Learning Outcomes coordinators. The team verified that the college is conducting an annual assessment of the effectiveness of its overall planning processes. The evidence of these assessments is delineated in several documents: the Spring 2012 Progress Report on the San Luis Obispo County Community College District Strategic Plan 2010-2013, the Spring 2013 Progress Report on the San Luis Obispo County Community College District Strategic Plan 2012-2014, the Cuesta College Educational Master Plan 2011-2016 Addendum, and the Presidents Planning Processes Assessment Report. These documents contain information about how the college assessed its own effectiveness and about steps that the college is taking or changes it is making as a result of this information. (Standards I.B.4, I.B.6, and I.B.7 Conclusion: Cuesta College has fully implemented a robust and comprehensive planning model. The model offers a continuous planning cycle of analysis, resource allocation, implementation, assessment, and improvement. The college has successfully completed

a full cycle with the new planning model and is now in full compliance with Eligibility Requirement 19: Institutional Planning and Evaluation.

Recommendation 2: Planning and Assessment To meet standards, the team recommends that the college complete the strategic plan, institute an ongoing systematic evaluation process that communicates and clarifies the assessment tools used to measure the effectiveness of ongoing planning, program review, resource allocation processes and student learning outcomes. (Standard 1.B, 1.B.3, 1.B.4, 1.B.6., 1.B.7) Observations: After several false starts with their district-wide planning processes, Cuesta College developed a comprehensive planning process that appeared to satisfy all of the requirements related to planning in Standard 1. As the 2012 Show Cause Evaluation Team reported: (T)he integrated planning model put together by Cuesta College addresses the shortcomings of the past and charts a clear path for a planning process that can be sustained over time and result in a regular cycle of continuous improvement. More specifically, Cuesta College has put in place an appropriate strategic plan and instituted an ongoing systematic evaluation process that communicates and clarifies the assessment tools used to measure the effectiveness of ongoing planning, program review, resource allocation processes and student learning outcomes (Standard 1.B, 1.B.3, 1.B.4, 1.B.6., 1.B.7). Despite this very positive assessment, the 2012 Team did not report that Cuesta College had satisfied Recommendation 2 because the college had not yet completed the annual planning cycle. It was anticipated that if the college successfully completed that planning cycle, then the college would have satisfied the recommendation and be in full compliance with the Standards. Evidence and Analysis The Integrated Planning Manual 2013 documents the planning processes at Cuesta College. This document is a key resource document that illustrates and guides the interweaving planning processes of the college. In the estimation of the team, this particular document is one of the clearest expositions of an integrated institutional planning process that the team has ever seen. The college reviewed and revised this document in 2013 and published the second edition of this manual. (Standard I.B.6) Similarly, Cuesta College recently created a document that is equally important to the institution. That document is entitled, Participatory Governance: Decision-Making and Committee Handbook. This handbook is a useful tool in codifying institutional processes and governance structures so that these elements are clearly defined and available for perusal to the college community. (Standard I.B.1) Additionally, it defines roles and

relationships of various stakeholder groups and parties, and informs the college community about opportunities for involvement and input. (Standard I.B.4) Cuesta College undertook a review of its mission statement in January of 2013 that was based on the results of a workshop held in November of 2012. (Standard I.A.3) The College Council created an ad hoc working group to revise the mission statement. This group developed a draft that was then submitted for review by various college committees and discussed in a college-wide forum. (Standard I.A.1) The SLOCCD Board of Trustees approved the new mission statement in May 2013. (Standard I.A.2) The college is using the new mission statement as a central component of its integrated planning processes. (Standard I.A.4) Another key component of the planning process is the strategic plan. The college implemented a strategic plan and reviewed its progress on that plan as documented in the Spring 2013 Progress Report on the San Luis Obispo County Community College District Strategic Plan 2012-2014. The college used the information from the review and other information to draft a new strategic plan (San Luis Obispo County Community College District Strategic Plan 2014-2017). (Standards I.B.2 and I.B.3) Further, the college prepared a progress report that determined the action steps that had been completed, analyzed these accomplishments in terms of progress made toward achieving institutional goals, and then reshaped or added new action steps for the next iteration of the plan based on this feedback. (Standards I. 3, I.B.4, and I.B.4) As the integrated planning process implemented by the district is still relatively new, it is crucially important to assess the various parts of the model and how they are working to ensure that all parts of the model are being implemented and that this model is contributing to a cycle of continuous improvement. Based on the 2013 Institutional Leaning Outcomes Assessment Report, the college updated the Institutional program Planning and Review documents and placed on the college web site copies of the assessments of Institutional Learning Outcomes. (Standards I.B.6 and I.B.7) The college conducted a survey, the Assessing Institutional Planning Processes Survey, and used the results to prepare a report document, the San Luis Obispo County Community College District Presidents Planning Processes Assessment Report. This report was used to make improvements to the planning process and to inform and reassure the college community that progress was being made on institutional goals. (Standards I.B.5, I.B.6 and I.B.7) Conclusions: The team verified that this recommendation and this standard have been fully met as a result of the college successfully completing all phases of its annual planning cycle. Cuesta College has provided ample evidence concerning the full actualization of its integrated planning model. It is the opinion of the team that the administrators, faculty, staff, students, and supporting community of Cuesta College have engineered a remarkable turnaround that is astonishing in its breadth and depth. To create a cultural shift of this magnitude in an institution the size of Cuesta College is a remarkable feat and should be applauded. If Cuesta College maintains its current course, there is every

reason to believe that this college will sustain these changes and improvements and achieve the level of excellence that it seeks.