COMPLAINT PROCESS

download PDF- Complaint Policy   |   Complaint Form    |   Litigation Agreement

Complaints Involving Affiliated Institutions

Accreditation by the Senior College Commission of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges is an expression of confidence that an institution is satisfactorily achieving its mission and educational purposes and that it meets or exceeds the Commission’s standards of quality, integrity, and effectiveness. The Commission values information provided by students, employees, and others in determining whether an institution’s performance is consistent with the Standards of Accreditation and Commission policies and procedures. The Commission’s interest also is in ensuring that member institutions maintain appropriate grievance policies and procedures and that these are reasonable, well publicized, and administered fairly and consistently. The Commission requires, in accord with federal regulations, that each institution maintain records of complaints and grievances and that these records be made available to the Commission upon request. Records are to be retained by institutions at least as long as the time period between Capacity and Preparatory Reviews.

The Commission has established procedures for the review of complaints involving candidate or member institutions when complaints address the institution’s failure to comply with Commission Standards of Accreditation. The Commission can consider such complaints against institutions only when the reported conditions are substantially documented and are related to Commission Standards, eligibility requirements, policies or procedures. Individuals interested in submitting information regarding an institution’s accreditability to be considered during an upcoming accreditation review should follow the policy on Third-Party Comment form, available at http://www.wascsenior.org/wasc. The Commission reserves the right to review information under either policy as it determines to be appropriate for the given circumstance.

Because the Commission’s complaint procedures are for the purpose of addressing any significant non-compliance with the Standards of Accreditation, the procedures are not intended to be used to involve the Commission in disputes between individuals and member institutions, or to cause the Commission to interpose itself as an adjudicatory or grievance-resolving body in individual matters of admission, granting or transfer of academic credit, grades, fees, student financial aid, student discipline, collective bargaining, faculty or staff appointments, promotion, tenure, contractual rights and obligations, and dismissals or similar matters. Nor does the Commission seek any type of compensation, damages, readmission, or any other redress on an individual’s behalf. The Commission does not respond to, or take action on, any complaint or allegation that contains defamatory statements. Further, the Commission does not serve as a review body when the outcome of institutional grievance or appeal processes is unsatisfactory to the complainant.

The Commission expects individuals to resolve individual complaints through the grievance procedures and appeal processes at the institution before submitting a complaint to the Commission. Therefore, the Commission’s usual practice is not to consider a complaint that is currently in administrative proceedings or in litigation. The Commission normally does not review matters involving criminal conduct. However, if it is determined in the preliminary review of the complaint by Commission staff that the complainant raises issues which are so immediate that delay may put the institution’s accreditation in jeopardy, or delay has the potential to cause harm to students or to the campus community, the Commission may, at its discretion, choose to proceed with the review of the complaint.

Because of the need for information to be current, except in extraordinary circumstances, the Commission will not consider complaints if one year or more has passed since the complainant completed the institution’s grievance procedure.

Procedures for Handling Complaints

1. An individual may make an oral or electronic inquiry regarding complaint procedures or about issues and concerns that could be considered complaints; however, the Commission’s response and its obligation to meet the procedures outlined here will begin only after the complainant submits a formal complaint using the WASC Complaint Form with accompanying documentation. The Commission will not act on anonymous complaints nor on complaints submitted on behalf of another individual. In rare cases and only when circumstances warrant, the Commission may review confidential complaints (A confidential complaint is one in which the complainant requests that his or her identity be kept confidential with respect to the institution.).

2. When a complaint form regarding a member institution is received, an assigned staff member acknowledges in writing receipt of the complaint within 30 business days. When a complaint form regarding a member institution is forwarded by another agency, that agency will receive a copy of the acknowledgement.

3. The complainant must complete all applicable sections of the Complaint Form for the complaint to be reviewed. In completing the Complaint Form, it is the complainant’s responsibility to do the following:

a. State the complaint in the clearest possible terms.

b. Describe the details and circumstances of the complaint. The narrative should state relevant and provable facts, moving beyond assertions and allegations to include the necessary information that will inform Commission staff in the review of the complaint.

c. List and include the documents that are in the complainant's possession and are necessary to support the veracity of the allegations in the closed complaint. The Commission expects substantialand sufficient documentation, but care should be taken that the materials are limited to and directly related to the reported case. Helpful documentation might include a copy of an institutional policy, relevant copy from the college Catalog, letters exchanged with the institution, learning agreements, etc.

d. List the steps taken to resolve the complaint, including relevant grievance and appeals processes, and describe the action taken by the institution to date. A copy of the institution’s response to the complainant as a result of following the institution’s grievance process should be included.

e. Acknowledge awareness that Commission staff may send a copy of the complaint to the institution.

f. Attest that the matter in question is not under litigation and not a matter involving criminal conduct by the complainant.

g. Sign and date the complaint.

4. The Commission recognizes the importance of timely resolution of complaints as promptly as feasible, consistent with fairness to the complainant and the institution. After acknowledging receipt of the complaint, WASC staff will review the complaint within 30 business days to determine if it is within the scope of Commission policies and jurisdiction and if there is adequate documentation.

a. If the complaint is not within the purview of the Commission, Commission staff will notify the complainant and the matter will be closed.

b. If it is not clear whether the complaint appears to be within the purview of the Commission, the complainant will be contacted in writing for further information or documentation in order to determine the status of the complaint.

c. If the complaint is determined to identify issues that are substantially documented with appropriate evidence; demonstrate that appropriate institutional appeal procedures have been utilized; and identify issues that may jeopardize the quality of educational programs, the general welfare and integrity of the institution, reveal a lack of due process, or raise other significant questions about the institution’s compliance with Commission Standards, Commission staff will proceed with the review.

d. If the complaint is within the purview of the Commission but the complaint has inadequate documentation, the complainant will be asked to provide further documentation. If the complainant fails to provide further documentation, the matter will be closed.

5. In those cases where there is sufficient substance to warrant further review, Commission staff will forward a copy of the complaint to the Accreditation Liaison Officer of the institution and request a response within 30 business days after receipt of the complaint. The Chief Executive Officer of the institution and the complainant will be copied on the letter to the institution. In consideration of the circumstances of, or issues raised in the complaint, the Commission may, on occasion, request a response within a shorter period.

6. When the response from the institution is received, Commission staff will review the information provided by the complainant and the institution and will determine one of the following:

a. If the institutional response satisfactorily addresses the issue(s) raised in the complaint, or if the Commission is otherwise satisfied upon its review that no violation of the Standards of Accreditation, eligibility requirements, policies, or procedures has occurred, the complaint will be closed and the complainant and institution will be notified in writing.

b. The institution’s response may be determined to have sufficient substance to warrant further review. The Commission staff member may undertake the review or a visiting team to the institution may be asked to investigate the matter further.

c. Where appropriate, a resolution may be suggested to the complainant and the institution, including recommendations for changes in policies or procedures related to the Standards of Accreditation and policies of the Commission.

d. If the institutional response is not received by the Commission within the requested time period; or if the Commission does not consider the institutional response to have satisfactorily resolved the issue(s) raised in the complaint; or if the Commission otherwise concludes that a violation of the Commission’s Standards, eligibility requirements, policies, or procedures may have occurred, the Commission may initiate further proceedings as the circumstances warrant, including the initiation of proceedings which may result in an adverse accreditation action. If the complaint raises issues regarding the noncompliance of an institution under Standard One on Institutional Integrity, the Commission may invoke its policy on “Summary Sanctions for Unethical Institutional Behavior.”

7. The complainant and the institution will be notified of the Commission’s determination regarding the complaint in a reasonably timely manner. In most cases, the complainant will be provided a copy of the institution’s response. Every effort will be made to expedite any further review and/or final decision; however, it is not possible to guarantee a specific time frame in which the process will be completed. If further review is warranted, the time required to conduct the investigation may vary considerably depending on the circumstances and nature of the complaint.

8. If a complaint prompts action by the Commission, it is placed in the institution’s file in the Commission office and may be shared with the visiting team at the next regularly scheduled institutional review. All complaint records are maintained in the Commission office for a period of ten (10) years.

9. The decision as communicated by Commission staff is final.

10. The Commission will process complaints as stated under this Policy, using good faith in its review. If during the processing of complaints, the complainant becomes abusive, threatening, or aggressive in communications with Commission staff or with anyone involved in responding to the complaint, the Commission reserves the right to suspend or terminate any further processing or action on the complaint. If the complaint process is terminated, such action is final and the case will not be reopened.