Public Disclosure Statement UPR RP 2010-11-18[1]

8/8/2019 Public Disclosure Statement UPR RP 2010-11-18[1]

1/5

Public Disclosure StatementUPR-Rio Piedras

November 18, 2010

By the Middle States Commission on Higher Education

This statement has been developed for use in responding to public inquiries, consistent with theCommissions policy on Public Communication in the Accrediting Process. It should be read inconjunction with the Statement of Accreditation Status for UPR-Rio Piedras, a copy of which isattached.

UPR-Rio Piedras, located in Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico, is a unit of the University of Puerto Rico. Ithas been accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education since 1946. UPR-RioPiedras is a public institution offering programs leading to the Bachelors, Masters, and Doctors

degrees. A summary of the most recent Commission actions relative to the institutionsaccreditation follows.

Current Accreditation Status

On November 18, 2010, the Commission acted to continue UPR-Rio Piedras probation becauseof a lack of evidence that the institution is currently in compliance with Standard 3 (InstitutionalResources) and Standard 4 (Leadership and Governance). The full text of the Commissionsaction is provided below. The full text of the Commissions standards is available online athttp://www.msche.org/publications/CHX06_Aug08REVMarch09.pdf

UPR-Rio Piedras remains accredited by the Middle States Commission on HigherEducation while on probation.

The Commission places an institution on Probation when, in the Commissions judgment, theinstitution is not in compliance with one or more Commission standards and that the non-compliance is sufficiently serious, extensive, or acute that it raises concerns about one or more ofthe following: the adequacy of the education provided by the institution; the institutions capacityto make appropriate improvements in a timely fashion; or the institutions capacity to sustain itselfin the long term. Probation is often, but need not always be, preceded by an action of Warning orPostponement. For details on the Commissions complete range of actions, read the MSCHE

policy on Range of Commission Actions on Accreditation. A follow-up report, called a monitoringreport, is required to demonstrate that the institution has made appropriate improvements to bringitself into compliance. A small team visit also is conducted to verify institutional status andprogress.

Summary of Recent Commission Actions

The University of Puerto Rico System (UPR), the principle public system for the Commonwealth,


2/5

consists of eleven campuses, each holding separate accreditation. On April 21, the students atUPR Rio Piedras declared a 48-hour strike, protesting actions taken by the UPR system centraladministration and closed down the gates of the campus. Students at other campuses voted to

join the strike and closed ten of the eleven campuses of the UPR system. On May 17, 2010,Commission staff met with senior University system officials and board members concerning the

ongoing strike. At the time, the University system agreed to provide a voluntary report, receivedby the Commission on June 1, 2010, responding to the Commissions concerns regardingcompliance with:

1. Requirement of Affiliation 3: that requires the institution to be operational, with studentsactively pursuing their degree programs.

2. Standard 3, Resources: that requires the availability and accessibility of the necessaryresources to achieve the institutions mission and goals.

3. Standard 4 (Leadership and Governance): that requires a system of governance that clearlydefines the roles of institutional constituencies in policy development and decision making, withsufficient autonomy to assure institutional integrity and to fulfill its responsibilities of policy and

resource development, consistent with the institutions mission.4. Standard 11: to provide the appropriate program length required for the granting of credits anddegrees.The report was received and reviewed by the Commission. On June 21, 2010 the Commissionwas informed that the students and central administration offices had reached an agreement andcampuses would reopen administratively, with classes resuming in July in order to allow thecampuses to complete the spring semester.

On June 24, 2010 the Middle States Commission on Higher Education acted as follows:

To note receipt of the voluntary information report. To place the institution on

probation because of a lack of evidence that the institution is in compliance withStandard 4 (Leadership and Governance) and Standard 11 (Educational Offerings).To request a monitoring report due by September 1, 2010, documenting evidence thatthe institution has achieved and can sustain ongoing compliance with (1) Standard 4(Leadership and Governance), including but not limited to the development andimplementation of clear institutional policies specifying the respective authority of thedifferent governance bodies and their respective roles and responsibilities in sharedgovernance; and (2) Standard 11 (Educational Offerings), including but not limited to aplan for assuring the rigor, continuity, and length of courses affected by theinstitutions closure. In addition, the report should document evidence of thedevelopment and/or implementation of a long-term financial plan, including steps

taken to improve the institutions finances and the development of alternative fundingsources (Standard 3). An on-site evaluation will follow submission of the report. Thepurpose of the on-site evaluation is to verify the information provided in the monitoringreport and the institution's ongoing and sustainable compliance with the Commission'saccreditation standards. To further direct a prompt Commission liaison guidance visitto discuss the Commission's expectations for reporting. To note that the institutionremains accredited while on probation. To note that the Periodic Review Report dueJune 1, 2010 was received and will be acted upon by the Commission in November.


3/5

On June 15, 2010, the institution submitted its Periodic Review Report, which was reviewed bythe Periodic Review Report Committee in October. In addition, on September 1, 2010 theinstitution submitted a monitoring report and on September 12-16, 2010 an on-site team visit tookplace. The monitoring report, the on-site visiting team report, and the institutional response werereviewed by the Committee on Follow-Up Activities on November 4, 2010. On November 18,

2010 the Commission acted as follows:

To note that the Commission liaison guidance visit took place. To document receiptof the monitoring and to note the visit by the Commission's representatives.

To document receipt of the Periodic Review Report and to note that the reportprovided limited information and analysis on Standard 3.

To continue the institution's probation due to a lack of evidence that the institution isin compliance with Standard 3 (Institutional Resources) and Standard 4 (Leadershipand Governance).

To request a monitoring report due by March 1, 2011, documenting evidence that theinstitution has achieved and can sustain ongoing compliance with Standards 3 and 4,including, but not limited to (1) five-year financial projections for the UPR Systemincluding information from audited financial statements for fiscal year 2010; (2)institutional pro-forma budgets that demonstrate the institution's ability to generate abalanced budget for fiscal years 2012 through 2015, including the personnel,compensation, and other assumptions on which these budgets are based (Standard3); (3) evidence of implementation of clear institutional policies specifying the

respective authority of the different governance bodies and their respective roles andresponsibilities in shared governance; (4) evidence that the Board of Trustees assistsin generating resources needed to sustain and improve the institution; (5) evidence ofa procedure in place for the periodic objective assessment of the Board of Trustees inmeeting stated governing body objectives and responsibilities; (6) evidence that stepshave been taken to assure continuity and stability of institutional leadership,particularly in times of governmental transition; (7) evidence that the UPR Action Planis implemented, that it is assessed, and the data are used for continuousimprovement of the institution's processes; (8) evidence that steps have been takento improve shared governance, especially in documenting how campus input issolicited and considered in decision making at the System level; and (9) evidence

that communication between the Central Administration and the institution and withinthe institution, is clear, timely, and accurate, and that the sources of suchcommunications are clearly defined and made available to all constituents (Standard4). An on-site evaluation will follow submission of the March 1, 2011 report.

To further request a monitoring report due by April 1, 2012 documenting evidence of(1) steps taken to use assessment results to improve budgeting, programs, services,processes, planning, and resource allocation, including establishment of clear


4/5

priorities and strategic goals to sustain the quality of education within current financialresources (Standards 2,3, and 7); (2) steps taken to strengthen general educationand implementation of a documented assessment process for oral communication,written communication, scientific reasoning, quantitative reasoning, and criticalanalysis and reasoning (Standard 12); and (3) development and implementation of an

organized and sustained assessment process to evaluate and improve studentlearning in all the graduate programs, including evidence of the use of appropriatedirect and indirect methods of assessment (Standard 14). A visit may followsubmission of the April 1, 2012 report. To note that the institution remains accreditedwhile on probation.

Current Status and Expected Activities

UPR-Rio Piedras remains accredited by the Middle States Commission on HigherEducation while on probation.

Following submission of a monitoring report on March 1, 2011, the Commission will conduct anon-site visit, which will assess the institutions compliance with the Commissions standards.Following the evaluation visit, a report by the visiting team will be completed. The monitoringreport, the on-site visit report and the institutional response to the on-site visit report will beconsidered by the Committee on Follow-Up Activities, and then by the Commission at its June2011 meeting.

At its June 2011 session, the Commission will take further action, in accordance with theCommissions policy, Range of Commission Actions on Accreditation (available at

http://www.msche.org/documents/P2.3-RangeofActions.doc ). If, based on the monitoring reportand on-site visit report, the Commission determines that UPR-Rio Piedras has made appropriateprogress in addressing the cited concerns, the Commission may act to remove the probation andreaffirm accreditation. If the Commission determines that progress sufficient to demonstratecompliance with its accreditation standards has not been made, the Commission may take furtheraction as allowed under the Range of Commission Actions on Accreditation.

In addition, the institution will submit an additional monitoring report on April 1, 2012, onStandards 2 (Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal), 3 (InstitutionalResources), 7 (Institutional Assessment), 12 (General Education), and 14 (Assessment ofStudent Learning). An on-site visit may occur after submission of the report if necessary. The

monitoring report, the on-site visit report and the institutional response to the on-site visit reportwill be considered by the Committee on Follow-Up Activities, and then by the Commission at itsJune 2012 meeting. At its June 2012 session, the Commission will take further action, inaccordance with the Commissions policy, Range of Commission Actions on Accreditation.


5/5

For More Information

The following resources provide additional information that may be helpful in understanding theCommissions actions and UPR-Rio Piedrass accreditation status:

Statement of Accreditation Status for UPR-Rio Piedras(www.msche.org/institutions_directory.asp) provides factual information about UPR-Rio Piedrasand the full text of the Commissions recent actions regarding the institution.

Characteristics of Excellence(http://www.msche.org/publications/CHX06_Aug08REVMarch09.pdf) provides the Commissionsaccreditation standards and requirements for affiliation.

Media Backgrounder(http://msche.org/documents/Media-Backgrounder-2010.doc ) answersquestions about accreditation such as What is accreditation? and What is the Middle States

Commission on Higher Education?

Informing the Public about Accreditation (www.chea.org/public_info/index.asp), published by theCouncil for Higher Education Accreditation, provides additional information on the nature andvalue of accreditation.

Public Communication in the Accrediting Process (www.msche.org/documents/P4.1-PublicCommunication.doc) explains what information the Commission makes public regarding itsmember institutions and what information remains confidential.

Range of Commission Actions on Accreditation (www.msche.org/documents/P2.3-RangeofActions.doc) and Standardized Language for Commission Actions on Accreditation

(www.msche.org/documents/P2.4-StandardizedLanguage_031308.doc ) explain the terms usedin the Commissions actions.

____________

Documents

Public Disclosure Statement UPR RP 2010-11-18[1]