Notification of Commission Actions
Spring 2016 Accreditation Cycle

The following publicly available information is provided by the Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing (ACEN) concerning the accreditation status of the following programs reviewed by the ACEN Board of Commissioners during its meeting on July 14-15, 2016. Commission staff will not speculate on what decision might be made by the ACEN Board of Commissioners the next time a program is reviewed. For additional information regarding ACEN accreditation process, access the Accreditation Manual at www.acenursing.org/accreditation-manual.

Access the ACEN 2013 Standards and Criteria by program type:

• Clinical Doctorate
• Master’s/Post-Master’s Certificate
• Baccalaureate
• Associate
• Diploma
• Practical

Initial and Continuing Accreditation Actions

---

Initial Accreditation

The Commission granted initial accreditation to the following programs:

• Bryant & Stratton College – Richmond (Associate) North Chesterfield, VA
• Campbellsville University (Baccalaureate) Campbellsville, KY
• Chattahoochee Technical College (Associate) Dallas, GA
• Colorado Mountain College (Baccalaureate) Glenwood Springs, CO
• Delaware Technical Community College – Jack F. Owens Campus (Practical) Georgetown, DE
• Eastern Arizona College (Associate) Thatcher, AZ
• Eastern New Mexico University (Master’s) Portales, NM
• EDP University of Puerto Rico – Hato Rey (Associate) San Juan, PR
• EDP University of Puerto Rico – San Sebastian (Associate) San Sebastián, PR
• Galen College of Nursing – Cincinnati (Associate) Cincinnati, OH
• Galen College of Nursing – Tampa Bay (Associate) St. Petersburg, FL
• Kingsborough Community College – CUNY (Associate) Brooklyn, NY
• Lincoln Land Community College (Practical) Springfield, IL
• Lincoln Memorial University (Clinical Doctorate) Harrogate, TN
• Lincoln Technical Institute (Practical) Lincoln, RI
• Mercy Hospital, a Campus of Plantation General Hospital (Associate) Miami, FL
• Mercyhurst University (Baccalaureate) North East, PA
• Pensacola State College (Baccalaureate) Pensacola, FL
• Rasmussen College – Land O’Lakes/East Pasco (Practical) Land O’Lakes, FL
• Rasmussen College – New Port Richey/West Pasco (Associate) New Port Richey, FL
• River Valley Community College (Associate) Claremont, NH
• South Florida State College (Baccalaureate) Avon Park, FL
• West Virginia University at Parkersburg (Baccalaureate) Parkersburg, WV

Continuing Accreditation

The Commission granted continuing accreditation to the following programs:

• Alle-Kiski Medical Center (Diploma) New Kensington, PA
• Anoka-Ramsey Community College (Associate) Coon Rapids, MN
• Aquinas College (Baccalaureate) Nashville, TN
• Arizona Western College (Associate) Yuma, AZ
• Broward County Public Schools (Practical) Coconut Creek, FL
• Butler County Community College (Associate) El Dorado, KS
• Cardinal Stritch University (Master’s) Milwaukee, WI
• Cochise College (Associate) Sierra Vista, AZ
• College of Coastal Georgia (Baccalaureate) Brunswick, GA
• Colorado Mountain College (Associate) Glenwood Springs, CO
• Eastern Kentucky University (Associate) Richmond, KY
• Eastern Oklahoma State College (Associate) Wilburton, OK
• Front Range Community College – Westminster Campus (Associate) Westminster, CO
• Gwinnett Technical College (Associate) Lawrenceville, GA
• H. Councill Trenholm State Community College (Practical) Montgomery, AL
• Helena College – University of Montana (Associate) Helena, MT
• Henrico County Public Schools (Practical) Henrico, VA
• Herzing University – Orlando (Associate) Winter Park, FL
• Indiana University Northwest (Baccalaureate) Gary, IN
• LaGuardia Community College – CUNY (Associate) Long Island City, NY
• Lakeland Community College (Associate) Kirtland, OH
• Lenape Technical School (Practical) Ford City, PA
• Lincoln Land Community College (Associate) Springfield, IL
• Lubbock Christian University (Baccalaureate) Lubbock, TX
• Meridian Technology Center (Practical) Stillwater, OK
• Miami Dade College (Baccalaureate) Miami, FL
• Midway University (Baccalaureate) Midway, KY
• Missoula College – University of Montana (Associate) Missoula, MT
• Monroe Community College (Associate) Rochester, NY
• Murray State College (Associate) Tishomingo, OK
• Neumann University (Baccalaureate) Aston, PA
• NHTI Concord’s Community College (Associate) Concord, NH
• Normandale Community College (Associate) Bloomington, MN
• Northeast Community College (Associate) Norfolk, NJ
• Ocean County College (Associate) Toms River, NJ
• Olympic College (Associate) Bremerton, WA
• Onondaga Community College (Associate) Syracuse, NY
• Orange County Community College (Associate) Middletown, NY
• Otero Junior College (Associate) La Junta, CO
• Ridgewater College (Associate) Willmar, MN
• Rockland Community College (Associate) Suffern, NY
• Roseman University of Health Sciences – South Jordan (Baccalaureate) South Jordan, UT
• State College of Florida, Manatee – Sarasota ( Baccalaureate) Bradenton, FL
• Tarrant County College (Associate) Fort Worth, TX
• Troy University (Clinical Doctorate) Troy, AL
• University of North Georgia (Baccalaureate) Dahlonega, GA
• University of Rio Grande (Associate) Rio Grande, OH
• Wagner College (Baccalaureate) Staten Island, NY
• Wagner College (Master’s) Staten Island, NY
• Washtenaw Community College (Associate) Ann Arbor, MI
• Western Nebraska Community College (Practical) Scottsbluff, NE

Continuing Accreditation – Remove Conditions Status

The Commission accepted the follow-up report, removed the conditions status, and granted continuing accreditation to the following programs:

• Albany State University (Baccalaureate) Albany, GA
• Albany State University (Master’s) Albany, GA
• Assabet Valley Regional Technical School (Practical) Marlborough, MA
• Carl Sandburg College (Practical) Galesburg, IL
• Carl Sandburg College (Associate) Galesburg, IL
• Crawford County Career & Technical Center (Practical) Meadville, PA
• Delaware County Intermediate Unit #25 (Practical) Broomall, PA
• Firelands Regional Health System (Diploma) Sandusky, OH
• Garden City Community College (Associate) Garden City, KS
• Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District (Associate) El Cajon, CA
• Highline Community College (Associate) Des Moines, WA
• Hopkinsville Community College (Associate) Hopkinsville, KY
• Lipscomb University (Baccalaureate) Nashville, TN
• Lone Star College – North Harris (Associate) Houston, TX
• Mercy College of Health Sciences (Associate) Des Moines, IA
• Mount Wachusett Community College (Practical) Gardner, MA
• Northeast Alabama Community College (Associate) Rainsville, AL
• Odessa College (Associate) Odessa, TX
• Saint Luke’s Hospital of Bethlehem (Diploma) Bethlehem, PA\
• Seattle Central College (Associate) Seattle, WA
• Seminole State College of Florida (Associate) Altamonte Springs, FL
• Sonoma State University (Baccalaureate) Rohnert Park, CA
• Sonoma State University (Master’s) Rohnert Park, CA
• Spartanburg Community College (Associate) Spartanburg, SC
• St. John’s Riverside Hospital (Associate) Yonkers, NY
• Stephen F. Austin State University (Baccalaureate) Nacogdoches, TX
• Walters State Community College (Associate) Morristown, TN
• West Georgia Technical College (Associate) Waco, GA
• Western New Mexico University (Associate) Silver City, NM
• York County School of Technology (Practical) York, PA

The Commission removed the conditions status and granted continuing accreditation to the following program:

• Our Lady of Lourdes School of Nursing/Camden County College (Diploma) Camden, NJ

The Commission removed the conditions status and granted continuing accreditation after a follow-up visit to the following programs:

   None

Continuing Accreditation – Remove Warning Status

The Commission removed the warning status and granted continuing accreditation after a follow-up visit to the following programs:

• Grays Harbor College (Associate) Aberdeen, WA
• Lurleen B. Wallace Community College (Associate) Opp, AL
• North Central Kansas Technical College (Associate) Hays, KS

Continuing Accreditation – Remove Warning for Good Cause Status

The Commission removed the warning for good cause status and granted continuing accreditation after a follow-up visit to the following programs:

• Chamberlain College of Nursing – Columbus (Associate) Columbus, OH

Affirm Continuing Accreditation

The Commission affirmed continuing accreditation after a focused visit to the following programs:

• Bryant & Stratton College – Akron (Associate) Akron, OH following a change in status with the state board of nursing; affirm the next onsite accreditation visit in Fall 2018.
• Denver School of Nursing (Baccalaureate) Denver, CO following the implementation of a RN-to-BSN online program option; affirm the next onsite accreditation visit in Spring 2017.
• Indiana University East (Master’s) Richmond, IN following the implementation of the new FNP program option; affirm the next onsite accreditation visit in Fall 2018.
• North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University (Baccalaureate) Greensboro, NC following the implementation of distance education and change in status with the state regulatory agency; affirm the next onsite accreditation visit in Spring 2022.
• Owens Community College (Associate) Toledo, OH following the implementation of a new curriculum; affirm the next onsite accreditation visit in Spring 2018.
• Sampson Community College (Associate) Clinton, NC following the implementation of the new online LPN-to-ADN program option; affirm the next onsite accreditation visit in Fall 2017.
• Sinclair Community College (Associate) Dayton, OH following the implementation of a new curriculum; affirm the next onsite accreditation visit in Fall 2020.

Continuing Accreditation with Conditions

The Commission granted continuing accreditation with conditions to the following programs:

• Aims Community College (Associate) Greeley, CO related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criteria 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum incorporates established professional standards, guidelines, and competencies and has clearly articulated student learning outcomes consistent with contemporary practice.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the student learning outcomes are used to organize the curriculum, guide the delivery of instruction, and direct learning activities.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum is developed by the faculty and regularly reviewed to ensure integrity, rigor, and currency and consistent documentation is maintained.
• Alfred State College, SUNY College of Technology (Associate) Alfred, NY related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criteria 4.2 and 4.3
    • There is a lack of evidence that the student learning outcomes are used to organize the curriculum, guide the delivery of instruction, direct learning activities, and evaluate student progress.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum is regularly reviewed to ensure integrity, rigor, and currency and consistent documentation is maintained.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, and 6.4.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes and the role-specific graduate competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion has been consistently met.
• Brightwood College – Las Vegas (Practical) Las Vegas, NV related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, and 6.4.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes and the role-specific graduate competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
    • There is a lack of evidence that job placement data are sufficient for program decision-making.
• Carrington College – Reno (Associate) Reno, NV related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1 and 6.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes, the program outcomes, the role-specific graduate competencies, and the ACEN Standards.
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
• Clarion University of Pennsylvania (Baccalaureate) Oil City, PA related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.4.2, and 6.4.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes.
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program completion has been assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner.
    • There is a lack of evidence that job placement has been assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner.
• Clarion University of Pennsylvania (Associate) Oil City, PA related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.4.2, and 6.4.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program completion has been assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner.
    • There is a lack of evidence that job placement data are sufficient for program decision-making.
• College of DuPage (Associate) Glen Ellyn, IL related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.4.1
    • The program’s three-year mean for the licensure examination pass rate has not been at or above the national mean for the same three-year period.
• College of Southern Idaho (Associate) Twin Falls, ID related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criteria 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.6, and 4.7
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum has clearly articulated student learning outcomes and program outcomes consistent with contemporary practice.
    • There is a lack of evidence that consistent terminology is utilized when referring to the student learning outcomes.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the student learning outcomes are used to organize the curriculum, guide the delivery of instruction, direct learning activities, and evaluate student progress.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum is developed by the faculty and regularly reviewed to ensure integrity, rigor, and currency and consistent documentation is maintained.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum and instructional processes reflect educational theory.
    • There is a lack of evidence that evaluation methodologies are varied, reflect established professional and practice competencies, and measure the achievement of the student learning outcomes.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, and 6.4.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes and the role-specific graduate competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion has been consistently met.
• El Centro College (Associate) Dallas, TX related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1 and 6.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence of the collection and trending of data by program option, location, and date of completion prior to aggregation for the program as a whole.
• El Centro College (Practical) Dallas, TX related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1 and 6.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes and the role-specific graduate competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence of the collection and trending of data by date of completion prior to aggregation for the program as a whole.
• Everett Community College (Associate)Everett, WA related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criterion 4.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum incorporates established professional standards, guidelines, and competencies and has clearly articulated student learning outcomes and program outcomes consistent with contemporary practice.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are realistic and stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes and program outcomes.
• Excelsior College (Associate) Albany, NY related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criteria 4.1 and 4.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum incorporates established professional standards, guidelines, and competencies and has clearly articulated student learning outcomes and program outcomes consistent with contemporary practice.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the student learning outcomes are used to organize the curriculum, guide the delivery of instruction, direct learning activities, and evaluate student progress.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.4.1, and 6.4.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes through all four (4) phases of the curriculum.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion is congruent with the ACEN guidelines.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the program’s three-year mean for the licensure examination pass rate has been at or above the national mean for the same three-year period.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion has been consistently met.
• Excelsior College (Baccalaureate) Albany, NY related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 3 Students, Criterion 3.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that the admission policies for nursing students are consistently applied and congruent with professional standards and best practices.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.4.2 
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion is congruent with the ACEN guidelines.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion has been consistently met.
• Excelsior College (Master’s) Albany, NY related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 3 Students, Criterion 3.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that the admission policies for nursing students are consistently applied and congruent with professional standards, best practices, and state regulations.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.4.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion is congruent with the ACEN guidelines.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion has been consistently met.
• Georgia Highlands College (Associate) Rome, GA related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1 and 6.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the systematic plan for evaluation of the nursing education unit emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes, and the role-specific graduate competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan includes specific, measurable expected levels of achievement for all Criteria, appropriate assessment methods, and a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that evaluation findings are aggregated, trended, and sufficient to inform program decision-making for the maintenance and improvement of the student learning outcomes.
• Gordon State College (Baccalaureate) Barnesville, GA related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, 6.4.2, and 6.4.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence of the aggregation and trending of data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program completion has been assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for job placement has been consistently met.
    • There is a lack of evidence that job placement assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner at six (6) to twelve (12) months post-graduation.
    • There is a lack of evidence that job placement data are sufficient for program decision-making.
• Great Plains Technology Center (Practical) Lawton, OK related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 1 Mission and Administrative Capacity, Criterion 1.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the nursing education unit is administered by a nurse who holds a graduate degree with a major in nursing.
• Greene County Career & Technology Center (Practical) Waynesburg, PA related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1 and 6.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes, the program outcomes, and the role-specific graduate competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
• Helene Fuld College of Nursing (Associate) New York, NY related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.4.1
    • The program’s three-year mean for licensure examination pass rate has not been at or above the national mean for the same three-year period.
• LaGrange College (Baccalaureate) LaGrange, GA related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criteria 4.2, 4.3, and 4.7
    • There is a lack of evidence that the student learning outcomes are used to organize the curriculum, guide the delivery of instruction, direct learning activities, and evaluate student progress.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the faculty regularly review the curriculum for integrity, rigor, and currency.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation methodologies measure the achievement of the student learning outcomes.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes.
• Luna Community College (Associate) Las Vegas, NM related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, 6.4.2, and 6.4.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes, the program outcomes, the role-specific graduate competencies, and the 2013 ACEN Standards and Criteria.
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion has been consistently met.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for job placement has been consistently met.
• Medtech College – Indianapolis (Practical) Indianapolis, IN related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1 and 6.4.2
    • There is lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion has been consistently met.
• Metro Technology Centers (Practical) Oklahoma City, OK related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criteria 4.1, 4.2, and 4.7
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum incorporates established professional standards, guidelines, and competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the student learning outcomes are used to organize the curriculum, guide the delivery of instruction, direct learning activities, and evaluate student progress.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the student learning outcomes consistently progress throughout the curriculum.
    • There is a lack of evidence that evaluation methodologies measure the achievement of the student learning outcomes.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1 and 6.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
• Moore Norman Technology Center (Practical) Norman, OK related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes and the role-specific graduate competencies.
• New England Institute of Technology (Associate) East Greenwich, RI related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, 6.4.1, and 6.4.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes, the program outcomes, and the role-specific graduate competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence of the collection and trending of data by date of completion prior to aggregation for the program as a whole.
    • The program’s three-year mean for the licensure examination pass rate has not been at or above the national mean for the same three-year period.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for job placement has been consistently met.
• San Antonio College (Associate) San Antonio, TX related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes.
• United Tribes Technical College (Practical) Bismarck, ND related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1 and 6.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes and the program outcomes.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.

Continuing Accreditation with Warning

The Commission granted continuing accreditation with warning to the following programs:

• Baltimore City Community College (Associate) Baltimore, MD related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 2 Faculty and Staff, Criterion 2.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the number of full-time faculty is sufficient to ensure that the student learning outcomes and program outcomes are achieved.
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criteria 4.1 and 4.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum incorporates established professional standards, guidelines, and competencies and has clearly articulated student learning outcomes and program outcomes consistent with contemporary practice.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the student learning outcomes are used to organize the curriculum, guide the delivery of instruction, direct learning activities, and evaluate student progress.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the student learning outcomes consistently progress throughout the curriculum.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, and 6.4.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes.
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence of the collection and trending of data by program option and date of completion prior to aggregation for the program as a whole.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
    • The program’s three-year mean for the licensure examination pass rate has not been at or above the national mean for the same three-year period.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the licensure examination data are assessed by program option in a systematic and ongoing manner.
• Bunker Hill Community College (Associate) Boston, MA related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 2 Faculty and Staff, Criterion 2.3
    • There is a lack of evidence that the faculty credentials meet governing organization and state requirements and consistent documentation is maintained.
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criteria 4.1 and 4.3
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum incorporates established professional standards, guidelines, and competencies consistent with contemporary practice.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum is regularly reviewed to ensure integrity, rigor, and currency and consistent documentation is maintained.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes and the role-specific graduate
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.

Continuing Accreditation with Warning for Good Cause

The Commission granted continuing accreditation with warning for good cause to the following programs:

• East Arkansas Community College (Associate) Forrest City, AR related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4.1, 6.4.2, and 6.4.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes and the program outcomes.
    • There is a lack of evidence of the collection and trending of data by program option prior to aggregation for the program as a whole.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
    • There is a lack of evidence that evaluation findings are shared with the communities of interest.
    • The program’s three-year mean for the licensure examination pass rate has not been at or above the national mean for the same three-year period.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion is congruent with the ACEN guidelines.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion has been consistently met.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for job placement has been consistently met.
• Herzing University – Madison (Associate) Madison, WI related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criterion 4.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that the curriculum incorporates established professional standards, guidelines, and competencies and has clearly articulated student learning outcomes and program outcomes consistent with contemporary practice.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.2 and 6.4.1
    • There is a lack of evidence of the collection and trending of data by program option prior to aggregation for the program as a whole.
    • The program’s three-year mean for the licensure examination pass rate has not been at or above the national mean for the same three-year period.
• Idaho State University (Associate) Pocatello, ID related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1 and 6.2
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes and the program outcomes.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
    • There is a lack of evidence that strategies/actions are identified when the expected levels of achievement are not met.
• Umpqua Community College (Associate) Roseburg, OR related to non-compliance with:
  • Standard 2 Faculty and Staff, Criterion 2.3
    • There is a lack of evidence that the faculty credentials meet governing organization and state requirements.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, and 6.4.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes, the program outcomes, and the role-specific graduate competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
    • There is a lack of evidence that job placement has been assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner.

Affirm Continuing Accreditation, Change Status to Continuing Accreditation with Conditions

The Commission affirmed the continuing accreditation and changed the accreditation status to continuing accreditation with conditions after a focused visit to the following programs:

• City Colleges of Chicago at Malcolm X College (Associate) Chicago, IL following the consolidation of the City Colleges of Chicago nursing programs as the program is in non-compliance with Standard 6 Outcomes.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, 6.4.2, and 6.4.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the systematic plan for evaluation of the nursing education unit emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes, the program outcomes, and the role-specific graduate competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that evaluation findings are aggregated, trended, and sufficient to inform program decision-making for the maintenance and improvement of the student learning outcomes.
    • The expected level of achievement for program completion has not been consistently met.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program completion rates are assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner.
    • There is a lack of evidence that job placement has been assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner.
• Fortis College – Indianapolis (Associate) Indianapolis, IN following a decline in licensure examination pass rates as the program is in non-compliance with Standard 6 Outcomes.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criteria 6.1, 6.2, 6.4.1, 6.4.2, and 6.4.5
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the student learning outcomes, the program outcomes, or the role-specific graduate competencies.
    • There is a lack of evidence that all expected levels of achievement are stated in specific and measurable terms.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the assessment methods are congruent with the expected levels of achievement and result in meaningful data.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence of the collection and trending of data by program option and date of completion prior to aggregation for the program as a whole.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program documentation reflects the analysis and use of data by the faculty in program decision-making.
    • There is a lack of evidence that strategies/actions are identified when the expected levels of achievement are not met.
    • The program’s three-year mean for the licensure examination pass rate has not been at or above the national mean for the same three-year period.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for the licensure examination pass rate has been consistently met.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the licensure examination data are assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion is congruent with the ACEN guidelines.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for program completion has been consistently met.
    • There is a lack of evidence that program completion has been assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the expected level of achievement for job placement has been consistently met.
    • There is a lack of evidence that job placement data are sufficient for program decision-making.
    • There is a lack of evidence that job placement has been assessed in a systematic and ongoing manner
• Houston Baptist University (Baccalaureate) Houston, TX following the implementation of the new RN-to-BSN program option offered via distance education as the program is in non-compliance with Standard 4 Curriculum and Standard 6 Outcomes.
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criteria 4.9 and 4.10
    • There is a lack of evidence that practice learning environments support the achievement of the student learning outcomes and program outcomes for the RN-to-BSN program option.
    • There is a lack of evidence that students participate in clinical experiences that are evidence-based and reflect contemporary practice and nationally established patient health and safety goals for the RN-to-BSN program option.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.1
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan emphasizes the ongoing assessment and evaluation of the program outcomes, the role-specific graduate competencies, and the ACEN Standards.
    • There is a lack of evidence of a specific timeframe for the evaluation of each component of the evaluation plan.
    • There is a lack of evidence that the evaluation plan contains a minimum of three (3) years of data for each component within the plan.

Affirm Continuing Accreditation, Change Status to Continuing Accreditation with Warning

The Commission affirmed the continuing accreditation and changed the accreditation status to continuing accreditation with warning after a focused visit to the following programs.

• Nightingale College (Associate) Ogden, UT following the implementation of the St. George and Pocatello off-campus instructional sites as the program is in non-compliance with Standard 4 Curriculum, Standard 5 Resources, and Standard 6 Outcomes.
  • Standard 4 Curriculum, Criterion 4.9
    • There is a lack of evidence that practice learning environments support the achievement of the student learning outcomes and program outcomes.
  • Standard 5 Resources, Criteria 5.2 and 5.4
    • There is a lack of evidence that physical resources are sufficient to ensure the achievement of the nursing education unit outcomes and meet the needs of the faculty, staff, and students at the DDC sites.
    • There is a lack of evidence that private spaces are available for faculty-student conferences at the DDC sites.
    • There is a lack of evidence that all students have sufficient access to the nursing skills laboratories to meet their learning needs at the DDC sites.
    • There is a lack of evidence that physical resources are sufficient to meet the needs of the faculty and students engaged in alternative methods of delivery.
  • Standard 6 Outcomes, Criterion 6.4.1
    • The program’s three-year mean for the licensure examination pass rate has not been at or above the national mean for the same three-year period.

Affirm Continuing Accreditation, Change Status to Continuing Accreditation with Warning for Good Cause

The Commission changed the accreditation status to continuing accreditation with warning for good cause after a focused visit to the following programs:

None

—

Adverse Actions

Any program denied initial or continuing accreditation has the right to forward comments regarding the Commission decision to the ACEN by May 5, 2016. The ACEN will forward to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education any comments submitted by the nursing program.

---

Deny Initial Accreditation

The Commission denied initial accreditation to the following program:

None

Deny Continuing Accreditation

The Commission denied continuing accreditation to the following program

None

—

---

Definitions

---

Continuing Accreditation: A determination by the ACEN Board of Commissioners that a nursing program is in compliance with all Accreditation Standards.

Continuing Accreditation with Conditions: A measure imposed by the ACEN Board of Commissioners following the determination of non-compliance with one (1) or two (2) Accreditation Standards. Next review and follow-up action(s) are determined by the Board of Commissioners.

Continuing Accreditation with Warning: A measure imposed by the ACEN Board of Commissioners following the determination of non-compliance with three (3) or more Accreditation Standards. Next review and follow-up action(s) are determined by the Board of Commissioners.

Continuing Accreditation with Warning for Good Cause: A measure imposed by the ACEN Board of Commissioners following the determination that a nursing program has not remedied deficiencies at the conclusion of its maximum monitoring period and the program has (a) has demonstrated significant recent accomplishments in addressing ; (b) has documented that it has the potential to remedy all deficiencies within the extended period as defined by the Commission; that is, that the program provides evidence which makes it reasonable for the Commission to determine it will remedy all deficiencies within the extended time defined by the Commission; and (c) provides assurance to the Commission that it is not aware of any other reasons, other than those identified by the Commission, why the nursing program could not be continued for good cause.

Denied Initial Accreditation: A determination by the ACEN Board of Commissioners that a nursing program is in non-compliance with one or more Accreditation Standard.

Denied Continuing Accreditation: A determination by the ACEN Board of Commissioners that a nursing program on conditions, warning, or warning for good cause is found to be in continued non-compliance with any Accreditation Standard. Thereafter the nursing program is removed from the listings of accredited programs.

Focused Visit: A site visit authorized by the ACEN Board of Commissioners to review significant accreditation-related information disclosed about a program as a result of:

• A substantive change;
• Information revealed about a program between periods of scheduled review;
• Information received from the governing organization’s accrediting body related to an adverse action;
• Information received from the program’s state regulatory agency for nursing related to a change in its status;
• Information revealed by a program during the Evaluation Review Panel process;
• Information received from the U.S. Department of Education regarding a program’s compliance responsibilities under Title IV of the Higher Education Act such as information related to a program’s most recent student loan default rates, the results of financial or compliance audits, program reviews, and any other information that may be provided by the U.S. Department of Education.

Follow-up Report: A report prepared by a program addressing the Standard(s) for which the nursing program was found to be in non-compliance during the program’s previous review by the ACEN Board of Commissioners.

Initial Accreditation: A determination by the ACEN Board of Commissioners that a nursing program is in compliance with all Accreditation Standards.

Remove the Conditions Status and Grant Continuing Accreditation: A determination by the ACEN Board of Commissioners that a nursing program is in compliance with the Accreditation Standard(s) that the program was found to be in non-compliance during the program’s previous review by the ACEN Board of Commissioners.

Remove the Warning for Good Cause Status and Grant Continuing Accreditation: A determination by the ACEN Board of Commissioners that a nursing program is in compliance with the Accreditation Standards that the program was found to be in non-compliance during the program’s previous review by the ACEN Board of Commissioners.

Remove the Warning Status and Grant Continuing Accreditation: A determination by the ACEN Board of Commissioners that a nursing program is in compliance with the Accreditation Standard(s) that the program was found to be in non-compliance during the program’s previous review by the ACEN Board of Commissioners.

Standard: See ACEN 2013 Standards and Criteria

Clinical Doctorate

Master’s/Post-Master’s Certificate

Baccalaureate

Associate

Diploma

Practical

Substantive Change Report: A report submitted by an accredited program informing the ACEN of a significant modification or expansion of the nature and scope of a nursing program and/or nursing education unit.