The New England Commission on Higher Education (NECHE) is one of several Department of Education-recognized accrediting commissions in the United States that provide institutional accreditation. The Commission requires institutions to undergo the evaluation process every ten years. November 7–10, 2021 was RIC's most recent NECHE evaluation team visit.
The New England Commission of Higher Education, established in 1885, is an accreditor of institutions of higher education as recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. The Commission is a voluntary, peer-based member association consisting of faculty, administrators, and trustees from affiliated institutions, members of the public, and the NECHE staff headed by President Lawrence Schall. The Commission is recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education as a reliable authority on the quality of education for the institutions it accredits.
As the authority and guardian of standards of excellence in higher education, NECHE embraces the roles of mentor and connector as it guides institutions through the rigors of the accreditation process. NECHE is respectful and responsive, committed to institutional success and improvement, and committed to balancing its responsibility to members institutions and members of the public, including prospective and current students.
Accreditation of an institution of higher education by the New England Commission indicates that it meets or exceeds criteria for the assessment of institutional quality periodically applied through a peer review process. An accredited college or university is one which has available the necessary resources to achieve its stated purposes through appropriate educational programs, is substantially doing so, and gives reasonable evidence that it will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. Institutional integrity is also addressed through accreditation.
Accreditation is voluntary and applies to the institution as a whole. As such, it is not a guarantee of every course or program offered, or the competence of individual graduates. Rather, it provides reasonable assurance about the quality of opportunities available to students who attend the institution.
The institution’s mission defines its distinctive character, provides direction for institutional activities, and forms the basis for institutional planning, resource allocation, assessment, and improvement. The institution has a system of governance, internal and at the Board level, that facilitates the accomplishment of its mission, provides for effective planning and evaluation, and supports institutional improvement and innovation. The institution has sufficient autonomy and control of its programs and operations to be held accountable for meeting the Commission’s
Standards for Accreditation.
The institution’s academic program and student services are consistent with and serve to fulfill its mission and purposes. The institution works systematically and effectively to plan, provide, oversee, evaluate, improve, and assure the quality and integrity of its academic programs and credits and degrees awarded as well as its student services and co-curricular programs. The institution supports teaching and learning through a well-qualified faculty and academic staff, who, in structures and processes appropriate to the institution, collectively ensure the quality of instruction and support for student learning. The institution sets a standard of student achievement appropriate to the degree or certificate awarded and develops systematic means to demonstrate how and what students are learning and to use the evidence provided to improve the academic program.
The institution has and maintains sufficient human, financial, information, physical, and technological resources and capacity to support its mission wherever and however its academic programs are offered. Through periodic evaluation, the institution demonstrates that its resources are sufficient to sustain the quality of its educational program and to support institutional improvement now and on an ongoing basis. The institution demonstrates, through internal and external evidence, its financial capacity to graduate its entering class. The institution administers its resources in an ethical manner that assures effective systems of enterprise risk management, regulatory compliance, and internal controls.
The institution demonstrates its educational effectiveness and the success of all students by ensuring appropriate levels of student achievement on mission-appropriate student outcomes. Based on sustained, evidence-based reflection and study, the institution employs comprehensive quality assurance processes to demonstrate and continually improve institutional effectiveness and student learning and success.
Through its commitment to ethical practices, transparency, and accountability, the institution upholds high standards in all its operations. It provides accurate, timely, and accessible information to all constituents, including the public and the Commission.
Read the Full Description of Each Standard
The most recent NECHE evaluation team visit to Rhode Island College was on November 7 – 10, 2021. Prior to the visit, Rhode Island College was engaged in a process of self-study, addressing the Commission’s Standards for Accreditation. An evaluation team visited the institution to gather evidence that the self-study is thorough and accurate. The team then makes its recommendation to the Commission. After the visit the Commission meets with the president and the review team chairperson to discuss the self-study, the review team report, and any other documents related to the process. Following a review process, the Commission itself takes the final action. Subsequently, the Commission notifies the College and the review team of its action on accreditation status.
The Commission requires institutions to undergo a comprehensive evaluation at least every ten years. The comprehensive evaluation process has three components:
Self-study is at the heart of accreditation. Both a product and a process, effective self-study serves accreditation’s dual purposes: quality assurance and institutional improvement. The self-study presents a concise picture of the institution as a dynamic entity with a sense of its history, an understanding of its present, and a vision of its future. By clearly identifying strengths and challenges, the institution demonstrates its ability to use analysis for improvement.
The on-site evaluation by a group of faculty and administrators provides the institution and the Commission with a valuable external perspective. Team members are selected because of their experience at an institution comparable to the one being evaluated. They are trained by Commission staff to validate the self-study in light of the institution’s mission.
After the visit, the team chair, using material submitted by the team members, will produce a draft report, first reviewed by the team and the Commission staff. The staff review is designed to help ensure that the report can stand on its own and that important areas are sufficiently addressed. Following any changes made in that initial review, the chair sends the draft report to the institution’s president for purposes of making sure the factual matters in the report are correct. Having made any appropriate changes based on that review, the chair sends the final version of the team report to the institution, which sends copies to the team members and to the Commission.
The institution’s president is asked to respond to the team report. Responses may indicate concurrence with the team’s findings, may provide a differing interpretive perspective on factual matters or may provide an update on how the institution has responded to the findings of the team.
Normally the Commission considers comprehensive evaluations the semester following the visit. The institution’s president (CEO) and team chair are invited to meet with the Commission for an interactive session to review the comprehensive evaluation. Included in the review are the self-study, team report, the confidential recommendation of the team chair, the institution’s response, and the history of Commission action with respect to the institution. In addition, in keeping with federal regulations, the Commission seeks and considers Public Comment regarding each evaluated institution.
The Range and Meaning of Commission Actions Affecting Institutional Status (58) outlines the actions the Commission may take with regard to an institution’s accreditation status. In addition, the Commission specifies areas where an institution should endeavor to improve its effectiveness. Official written notification of the Commission decision is provided to the institution shortly after the Commission meeting.
Institutional Research & Planning supports our students’ success by providing internal and external stakeholders with accurate, timely, appropriate and usable information and analysis for decision-making that propels the mission of the college forward.