Introduction to Institutional

Quality and Accreditation

From an ACCJC Workshop
by Deborah G. Blue and G.
Jack Pond, November, 2006
Adapted by Rachel Mason and
Todd V. Titterud, Brooks College,
August, 2007

Revised and Edited by Todd V.

Titterud, The Follow-Up Report,
December, 2009
http://thefollowupreport.blogspot.com/
The Follow-Up Report https://sites.google.com/site/thefollowupreport/
This presentation will cover:

z Regional accreditation in the United States

z The Accrediting Commission for Community and
Junior Colleges of the Western Association of
Schools and Colleges
z The purposes of accreditation and overview of the
ACCJC accreditation process
z Overview of the 2002 Standards of Accreditation
z The reliance on evidence in accreditation

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 2

 Regional Accreditation and
the ACCJC

The Follow-Up Report

Regional Accreditation

z Regional accreditation of postsecondary institutions is

a voluntary, non-governmental, self-regulatory process
of quality assurance and institutional improvement.
z Regional accreditors accredit the whole institution.
z Regional accreditors are recognized by the U.S.
Department of Education.
z Regional accreditation qualifies institutions and
enrolled students for access to federal funds to support
teaching, research, and student financial aid.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 4

U.S. Accreditation Regions

z The United States is divided into 6 accreditation regions, each

with it’s own organization(s) for postsecondary accreditation.
– Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools (MSACS)
– New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC)
– North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCACS)
– Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS)
– Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU)
z (Became a separate independent organization in 2004 when the Northwest
Association of Schools and Colleges and Universities was disbanded)
– Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC)

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 5

U.S. Accreditation Regions (continued)

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 6

Regional Accreditation
Organizations

z There are 8 regional accreditation organizations for postsecondary

education within the six accreditation regions.
– Middle States Association: Commission on Higher Education
– New England Association: Commission on Institutions of Higher
Education and Commission on Technical and Career Institutions
z (As of 2009 the CTCI only accredits non-degree granting postsecondary institutions)
– North Central Association: Higher Learning Council
– Southern Association: Commission on Colleges
– Northwest: Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities
– Western Association: Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges
and Universities and Accrediting Commission for Community and
Junior Colleges

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 7

Western Association of Schools and
Colleges (WASC)

z WASC has two commissions for higher education

accreditation.
– The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior
Colleges (ACCJC) accredits associate degree granting institutions
– Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities
(ACSCU, commonly called “WASC Senior”) accredits colleges and
universities offering the baccalaureate degree and above
z WASC also has a separate commission for the
accreditation of K-12 institutions
– The Accrediting Commission for Schools (ACS)

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 8

The ACCJC/WASC Region

z The ACCJC/WASC region includes California,

Hawaii, the Territories of Guam and American
Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, the Republic of Palau, the Federated States
of Micronesia, and the Republic of the Marshal
Islands.
z The region includes public, private, secular, faith-
based, non-profit and for-profit institutions with
diverse missions.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 9

The ACCJC Commission

z The Commission is a recognized regional

accreditor by the U.S. Department of
Education (USDE)
– The Secretary of Education recognizes select accrediting
agencies as reliable authorities regarding the quality of
education or training offered by the institutions or programs
they accredit.
– Accreditation by a recognized accrediting agency is part of
the requirements for institutions to participate in federal
student aid programs.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 10

The ACCJC Commission (continued)

z The ACCJC is also recognized as a regional

accreditor by the Council for Higher Education
Accreditation (CHEA)
– Recognition by CHEA affirms that standards and processes
of accrediting organizations are consistent with established
quality, improvement, and accountability expectations
– Recognition requires accreditors to meet the CHEA
eligibility and recognition standards
– CHEA requires a recognition review every ten years and
interim reports at the end of the third and sixth years.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 11

The ACCJC Commission (continued)

z The Commission is composed of nineteen

members including three administrators, five faculty,
five public members, one representative each from
the California Community College Chancellor’s
Office, the Western Pacific institutions, the Hawaii
Community Colleges, the independent colleges, and
one representative from each of the other two WASC
commissions (ACSCU and ACS).
z Commissioners are appointed for staggered three-
year terms and appointments are generally limited to
two terms per Commissioner
Institutional Quality and Accreditation 12
The ACCJC Commission (continued)

z The Commission meets in regular session twice

each year (in January and June) to consider the
accreditation status of institutions evaluated since
the previous meeting and to address policy and
organizational business.
z Commission contact information:
– Mail: ACCJC/WASC, 10 Commercial Blvd., Suite 204,
Novato, CA 94949
– Phone: 415-506-0234
– Fax: 415-506-0238
– Email: accjc@accjc.org

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 13

The ACCJC Commission (continued)

z The Commission’s full-time staff at the Novato, CA

office consists of a:
– President
– Vice President of Commission Operations
– Vice President of Policy and Research
– Vice President, Team Operations and Communication
– Associate Vice President
– Business Officer/Assistant to the President
– Administrative Assistant, and
– Information Technology/Administrative Support.
z Current staff information is available at:
http://www.accjc.org/commission_staff.htm

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 14

Commission Actions on Institutions

z The Commission determines the accredited status of

a member institution.
– The Commission acts to Affirm, Reaffirm, Defer, Sanction,
or Terminate accreditation
z The Commission communicates the accreditation
decision to the institution through Action Letters.
z The Commission communicates the accreditation
decision to the public through its website
(http://www.accjc.org/recent_commission_actions.htm).

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 15

 ACCJC
Commission
Actions

Reaffirm
Accept Report Defer Decision Apply Sanction
Accreditation

Midterm Report
or
Issue Warning
Follow-Up Report
and/or Impose
Focused Midterm Probation
Report
(with/without Visits)
Order Show
Cause
Derived from the ACCJC Accreditation Reference Handbook, August 2009,
http://www.accjc.org/pdf/Accreditation%20Reference%20Handbook%20August%202009.pdf
by Todd V. Titterud, The Follow-Up Report, https://sites.google.com/site/thefollowupreport/Home/actions

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 16

Purposes of Accreditation

z To provide assurance to the public that the

education provided by institutions meets
acceptable levels of quality
z To promote continuous institutional
improvement
z To raise the quality of higher educational
institutions in the region and nation

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 17

Continuous Quality Improvement

ACCJC encourages and supports institutional

development through:
z Establishing standards of quality based upon excellent practices
in higher education
z Evaluating institutions with these standards using a three-part
process that entails:
– Self Review (Comprehensive Institutional Self-Studies, Midterm
Reports, Follow-Up Reports, Special Reports, Annual Reports, and
Substantive Change Reports)
– Peer Review (Team Visits and Reports)
– Commission Review (Executive Sessions, Action Letters, and
Recommendations)

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 18

Schedule of Institutional Review

z Comprehensive Evaluation and Visit – Six Year Cycle

(Institutional Self-Study with Team Visit & Report)
z Midterm Report – 3rd year
– Or Focused Midterm Report
– Or Focused Midterm Report with Team Visit & Report
z Follow-Up Reports – as needed
– Or Follow-Up Reports with Team Visit & Report
z Special Reports – as needed
– Or Special Reports with Team Visit & Report
z Annual Reports – areas covered change as needed
– Financial, SLOs & Assessment, Distance Education, and more expected
z Substantive Change Reports – as needed

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 19

ACCJC Six-Year Action Letter
On-Going
Systematic
Accreditation Cycle (Reaffirmation or Sanction)
Planning and
Assessment
Cycles*
Year Six
Commission
Meetings

Midterm Report
Team Visit and On-Going (or Focused Midterm Report)

Report Continuous
Accreditation (With or Without)

Reaffirmation Team Visit and

Institutional Cycle Report
Self-Study

Commission
Meetings
On-Going Year Three *Ongoing cycles supplemented
Systematic by Follow-Up Reports and
Planning and Action Letter additional Team Visits, Reports,
Source: Todd V. Titterud, Assessment
The Follow-Up Report, (Acceptance or Sanction) and Commission Actions in
https://sites.google.com/site/th Cycles* intervening years due to
efollowupreport/action-letters-
and-reports Sanctions or Commission
Concerns.
 Standards of Accreditation
and Their Evolution

The Follow-Up Report

ACCJC Standards of Accreditation:

z Criteria of educational quality which

– Are deemed necessary for high-quality
education,
– Reflect best practice (not common practice) in
higher education,
– Apply to diverse institutions, and
– Must be met or exceeded to attain and
maintain accreditation

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 22

The Standards are not:

z Inclusive of every good practice in higher

education,
z Representative of state or system regulations
or requirements (or used to enforce those
regulations or requirements), or
z Meant to represent the “standards” of other
groups that purport to establish quality best
practices.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 23

Evolution of the Standards

z In the 1960’s, the Standards required basic

structures and processes to be in place and
minimal resources to be available.
z In the 1990’s, the Standards added a
requirement that colleges evaluate student
achievement, evaluate program quality, and
improve both.
Continued

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 24

Evolution of the Standards (continued)

z In the 2000’s, the Standards highlighted the

requirement that colleges evaluate student
learning and link student learning to
institutional assessment and improvement.
– Student Learning Outcomes Assessment
– Integrated Planning and Assessment
– Continuous Quality Improvement
– Evidence-Based/Data-Driven Decision-
Making
Institutional Quality and Accreditation 25
Evolution of the Standards (continued)

z The Emphasis in regional accreditation has

changed:
– In previous decades accrediting bodies focused
on institutional resources and processes.
z They assumed good things resulted from good processes
supported by sufficient resources.
– Accreditors now require institutions to determine
and evaluate results and outcomes, to discuss
those widely within the college, and to show the
results to accreditors and, in some cases, the
public. Colleges must also demonstrate work to
improve results.
http://www.accjc.org/pdf/Executive%20Leadership%20Presentation%20Nov%202007.pps

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 26

 The 2002 Standards of
Accreditation

The Follow-Up Report

The ACCJC Standards

z Standard I: Institutional Mission

and Effectiveness
z Standard II: Student Learning
Programs and Services
z Standard III: Resources
z Standard IV: Leadership and
Governance
Institutional Quality and Accreditation 28
Standard I – Institutional Mission and
Effectiveness

The institution demonstrates strong commitment to a

mission that emphasizes achievement of student
learning and to communicating the mission internally
and externally. The institution uses analyses of
quantitative and qualitative data and analysis in an
ongoing and systematic cycle of evaluation, integrated
planning, implementation, and re-evaluation to verify
and improve the effectiveness by which the mission is
accomplished.
Continued

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 29

Standard I
Institutional Mission and Effectiveness (continued)

z A. Mission – The institution has a statement of mission that

defines the institution’s broad educational purposes, its intended
student population, and its commitment to achieving student
learning.

z We publicly dedicate ourselves to the success of our

students in achieving the learning goals of our programs.
z We all have a shared mission to help our students learn what
the programs have decided they need to learn in order to
succeed.
Continued

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 30

Standard I
Institutional Mission and Effectiveness (continued)

z B. Improving Institutional Effectiveness –

The institution demonstrates a conscious effort to produce and support
student learning, measures that learning, assesses how well learning
is occurring, and makes changes to improve student learning.

The institution also organizes its key processes and allocates its
resources to effectively support student learning. The institution
demonstrates its effectiveness by providing:

1) evidence of the achievement of student learning outcomes and

2) evidence of institution and program performance.

The institution uses ongoing and systematic evaluation and planning to

refine its key processes and improve student learning.
Continued

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 31

Standard I
Institutional Mission and Effectiveness (continued)

z B. Improving Institutional Effectiveness-

z All of us must work to achieve, support, and improve
student learning.
z All of us must test how well we are doing this and change
what we do so we will do it better.
z We must constantly prove we are doing this.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 32

Standard II – Student Learning
Outcomes and Services

The institution offers high-quality instructional

programs, student support services, and library and
learning support services that facilitate and
demonstrate the achievement of stated student
learning outcomes. The institution provides an
environment that supports learning, enhances
student understanding and appreciation of diversity,
and encourages personal and civic responsibility as
well as intellectual, aesthetic, and personal
development for all of its students.
Continued

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 33

 Standard II
Student Learning Outcomes and Services (continued)

z A. Instructional Programs –
The institution offers high quality instructional programs in
recognized and emerging fields of study that culminate in
identified student outcomes leading to degrees, certificates,
employment, or transfer to other higher education institutions or
programs consistent with its mission.

z The value of our programs is determined by the values

placed on the abilities of our students by employers and
other colleges.
Continued

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 34

 Standard II
Student Learning Outcomes and Services (continued)

z A. Instructional Programs –
Instructional programs are systematically assessed in order to
assure currency, improve teaching and learning strategies, and
achieve stated student learning outcomes. The provisions of this
standard are broadly applicable to all instructional activities
offered in the name of the institution.

z We consistently test all of our programs and services to

maintain and improve their quality and the value of our
students to employers and other colleges.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 35

Standard II
Student Learning Outcomes and Services (continued)

z B. Student Support Services –

The institution recruits and admits diverse students who are
able to benefit from its programs, consistent with its mission.
Student support services address the identified needs of
students and enhance a supportive learning environment. The
entire student pathway through the institutional experience is
characterized by a concern for student access, progress,
learning, and success. The institution systematically assesses
student support services using student learning outcomes,
faculty and staff input, and other appropriate measures in order
to improve the effectiveness of these services.
Continued

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 36

Standard II
Student Learning Outcomes and Services (continued)

z B. Student Support Services –

z We enroll student who reflect the diversity of our nation,
state, and community.
z We enroll students who are able to succeed in our programs.
z We find out what our students need in order to succeed and
we provide it.
z All of us constantly work together to make it easier for our
students to do what they have to do in order to succeed.
z We measure our students’ success and work together to
change what we do to make our students MORE successful.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 37

Standard II
Student Learning Outcomes and Services (continued)

z C. Library and Learning Support Services –

Library and other learning support services for students are
sufficient to support the institution’s instructional programs and
intellectual, aesthetic, and cultural activities in whatever format
and wherever they are offered. Such services include library
services and collections, tutoring, learning centers, computer
laboratories, and learning technology development and training.
The institution systematically assesses these services using
student learning outcomes, faculty input, and other appropriate
measures in order to improve the effectiveness of the services.
The institution provides access and training to students so that
library and other learning support services may be used
effectively and efficiently.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 38

Standard II
Student Learning Outcomes and Services (continued)

z C. Library and Learning Support Services –

z We supply all of our students all of the different types of

tools and assistance that they need in order to succeed.
z We are always working together and testing ourselves to
constantly make it as easy as possible for all of our
students to benefit as much and as quickly as possible
from all of the necessary tools and assistance we provide.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 39

Standard III – Resources

The institution effectively uses its human, physical,

technology, and financial resources to achieve its
broad educational purposes, including stated student
learning outcomes, and to improve institutional
effectiveness.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 40

Standard III
Resources (continued)

z A. Human Resources –
The institution employs qualified personnel to support student
learning programs and services wherever offered and by
whatever means delivered, and to improve institutional
effectiveness. Personnel are treated equitably, are evaluated
regularly and systematically, and are provided opportunities for
professional development. Consistent with its mission, the
institution demonstrates its commitment to the significant
educational role played by persons of diverse backgrounds by
making positive efforts to encourage such diversity. Human
resource planning is integrated with institutional planning.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 41

Standard III
Resources (continued)

z A. Human Resources –
z We hire people who can do their jobs and who are able to do
so with increasing levels of success.
z We treat our employees fairly, while making sure they do a
good job and helping them become capable of doing an even
better job.
z We constantly work together and plan ahead to make sure we
have the people we need to do the job we need when we need
it to continually support and improve student success.
z We hire people who reflect the diversity of our nation, state,
and community.
Institutional Quality and Accreditation 42
Standard III
Resources (continued)

z B. Physical Resources –
Physical resources, which include facilities, equipment, land,
and other assets support student learning programs and
services and improve institutional effectiveness. Physical
resource planning is integrated with institutional planning.

z We constantly work together and plan ahead to make sure

we have the space, materials, and equipment we will need
to continually support and improve student success.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 43

Standard III
Resources (continued)

z C. Technology Resources –
Technology resources are used to support student learning
programs and services and to improve institutional
effectiveness. Technology planning is integrated with
institutional planning.

z We constantly work together and plan ahead to make sure

we have the technology resources we will need to
continually support and improve student success.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 44

Standard III
Resources (continued)

z D. Financial Resources –
Financial resources are sufficient to support student learning
programs and services and to improve institutional
effectiveness. The distribution of resources supports the
development, maintenance, and enhancement of programs
and services. The institution plans and manages its financial
affairs with integrity and in a manner that ensures financial
stability. The level of financial resources provides a
reasonable expectation of both short-term and long-term
financial solvency. Financial resource planning is integrated
with institutional planning.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 45

Standard III
Resources (continued)

z D. Financial Resources –

z We constantly work together and plan ahead to make sure

we have the money we need, when we need it, to hire the
people and purchase the resources we need to continually
support and improve student success.
z We constantly work together and plan ahead to ethically
and effectively acquire, manage, and allocate the monies
we need whenever and wherever they are needed to
continually support and improve student success.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 46

Standard IV – Leadership and
Governance

The institution recognizes and utilizes the

contributions of leadership throughout the
organization for continuous improvement of the
institution. Governance roles are designed to
facilitate decisions that support student learning
programs and services and improve institutional
effectiveness, while acknowledging the designated
responsibilities of the governing board and the
chief administrator.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 47

Standard IV
Leadership and Governance (continued)

z A. Decision-Making Roles and Processes –

The institution recognized that ethical and effective leadership
throughout the organization enables the institution to identify
institutional values, set and achieve goals, learn, and improve.

z All of us who are responsible for making decisions do so

in a way that is consistently ethical, timely, effective, and
successfully supports and improves student success.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 48

Standard IV
Leadership and Governance (continued)

z B. Board and Administrative Organization –

In addition to the leadership of individuals and constituencies,
institutions recognize the designated responsibilities of the
governing board for setting policies and of the chief
administrator for the effective operation of the institution. Multi-
college district/systems clearly define the organizational roles of
the district/system and the colleges.

z Our governing board is responsible for setting the policies

that guide the college and our president is responsible for
making sure our college operates successfully.
z At each level of organization we all know and agree about
who is responsible for what.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 49

 The Reliance on Evidence
in ACCJC Accreditation

The Follow-Up Report

The Reliance on Evidence

The ACCJC must verify that

valid evidence is offered by an
institution and that the evidence
supports the institution’s claim
that it meets accreditation
standards.
Institutional Quality and Accreditation 51
Evidence should include:

z Demographic and institutional data

– Numbers and variety of backgrounds of students
and employees, financial statements, achievement
measures, effectiveness indicators, etc.
z Quantitative and Qualitative data
– Evidence includes things that can be counted and
things that can not be counted
z Documentary materials
– Policies, agendas, minutes, guides, handbooks, etc.)

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 52

Evidence of Student Achievement
(Student progress through the institution)

z Student preparedness for college

z Student needs
z Course completion data
z Retention from term to term
z Progression to the next course/course level
z Program (major) completion
z Graduation rates
z Transfer rates
z Job placement rates
z Scores on licensure exams
z Etc.
Institutional Quality and Accreditation 53
Evidence of Student Learning Outcomes
(Student mastery of knowledge, skills, etc.)

EVIDENCE THAT:
z SLOs are developed and disseminated
– We have decided upon and shared with each other
what we want our students to learn while they are at
our college.
z Samples of student work are being collected
– We collect student work that shows what they have
learned and how well they are learning it.
Continued

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 54

Evidence of Student Learning Outcomes
(Student mastery of knowledge, skills, etc.) (continued)

EVIDENCE THAT:
z Summary data on SLOs is being collected
– We review student work to see if they are learning what we
want them to learn and keep track of how well they are
doing.
z SLO attainment is measured and analyzed and results
are used for self evaluation, planning and improvement.
– We determine how well our students are learning what we
want and change what we do so that our students learn
more and learn it better.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 55

Evidence-Based Institutions

z Gather it routinely and systematically

– A consistent and normal part of our job is to collect
evidence of how well we and our students are doing.
z Analyze and reflect upon it
– We constantly look at, question, and review the evidence
of how well we and are students are doing in order to find
ways for all of us to always do better.
Continued

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 56

Evidence-Based Institutions (continued)

z Publish it and share it widely within the college

(Research Reports, Fact Books, Program Reviews, Plans, etc.)
– We openly tell each other how well and how poorly we are
doing, and what we plan to do about it.
z Use it to plan and implement course, program
and institutional improvements.
– We make our decisions on what we are going to do and
how we are going to do it based on our analysis of the
evidence of student learning in order to increase student
success.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 57

Evidence-Based Institutions (continued)

z Create a systematic cycle of evidence-based

decision-making through Integrated Planning
and Assessment.
– We make our plans based on our analysis of student and
institutional needs and performance.
– We allocate resources and act to implement our plans.
– We record and evaluate the outcomes of our actions.
– We change our actions and resource allocations to
continuously improve student and institutional outcomes.
– We all do all of this consistently on a regular basis.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 58

Integrated Planning and Assessment
Using Evidence to Continuously Assess Goal Achievement
Progress and Decision-Making Effectiveness
Evaluation
Re-Evaluation

On-Going
Systematic
Integrated
Implementation Planning and Planning
Assessment
Cycle

Resource
Allocation
Source: Todd V. Titterud, The Follow-Up Report, https://sites.google.com/site/thefollowupreport/, http://thefollowupreport.blogspot.com/

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 59

Source and Revision History

z This presentation is derived from the two presentations by Dr.

Deborah G. Blue and Mr. G. Jack Pond of the ACCJC given in
Institutional Quality and Accreditation: A Workshop on the
Basics, Community College League of California Annual
Partner Conference, November, 2006.
z These presentations were revised and adapted by Rachel
Mason and Todd V. Titterud in 2007 for employee training
sessions on accreditation and continuous quality improvement
at Brooks College, Long Beach, CA.
z The presentations were merged, revised, updated, and
expanded by Todd V. Titterud for The Follow-Up Report in
2009.

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 60

Resources

ACCJC (http://www.accjc.org/index.htm)
z Accreditation Standards,
http://www.accjc.org/pdf/ACCJC_WASC_Accreditation_Standards.pdf
z Accreditation Reference Handbook,
http://www.accjc.org/pdf/Accreditation%20Reference%20Handbook%20August%202009.p
df
z Guide to Evaluating Institutions,
http://www.accjc.org/pdf/Guide%20to%20Evaluating%20Institutions%20August%202009.p
df
z ACCJC Bylaws and WASC Constitution, http://www.accjc.org/bylaws.htm
z FAQs on Accreditation, http://www.accjc.org/faq_on_accreditation.htm
z Accreditation and Leadership: What Executives Need to Know,
http://www.accjc.org/pdf/Executive%20Leadership%20Presentation%20Nov%202007.pps

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 61

Resources (continued)

Other
z U.S. Department of Education, http://www.ed.gov/index.jhtml
z Council for Higher Education Accreditation, http://www.chea.org/
z The Follow-Up Report, https://sites.google.com/site/thefollowupreport/
z The Follow-Up Report Press, http://thefollowupreport.blogspot.com/

Institutional Quality and Accreditation 62