Program Review of Accredited Programs

Programs that participate in a site visit and complete the external (national/state) accreditation process through an official accrediting organization may conduct an abbreviated campus program review.

Before sending documents to accrediting agency

Create your accreditation review team and follow the steps prior to external review as described in the Timelines Prior to External Accreditation Review.

Internal Accreditation Signature Form
Instructions for Circulating the Internal Accreditation Signature Form

After accrediting agency campus visit

The Abbreviated Program Review is submitted to and evaluated by the undergraduate and/or graduate Program Review Officer and contains the following documents for review: 

1. Evidence of National/State Accreditation. Typically, this is a letter to the President from the accrediting board.
2. An up-to-date SOAP (Student Outcomes Assessment Plan) submitted for posting on the OIE website. The SOAP must use the university template.
3. A five-year analysis of enrollment trends, graduation rates, and achievement gaps using the OIE program review data set as a reference. The analysis must include action plans to address managing enrollment in light of capacity, increasing graduation rates, and closing achievement gaps.

*NOTE: (Particularly applicable to Kremen) APM 220 paragraph 1, sentence 3, states that "For the purposes of program review, a program is defined as a course of study leading to a degree." Because credentials do not lead to degrees, they are not required to have a SOAP or submit assessment reports. Submit evidence of accreditation to the undergraduate and/or graduate Program Review Officer for evaluation (see Review Process, below), after which a Close of Cycle memo will be issued by the Provost.

Procedure for submission of Abbreviated Program Review
Once the program receives the official letter from the accrediting organization granting national accreditation, the program Chair will notify the Program Review Coordinator, above, who will send the exact due date for the supplemental items and any additional information regarding the abbreviated review.

The three supplemental items described above should be submitted electronically to the Program Review Coordinator who will then review the documents for content and forward them to the appropriate campus Program Review Officer(s), Dr. Bernadette T. Muscat (undergraduate) and/or Dr. Joy Goto (graduate).

Submission of supplemental materials must be received within six months of receipt of the letter from the accrediting body granting national accreditation.

Review Process
After review by the Program Review Officers:

• Undergraduate programs - The Review Officer issues a letter to Department Chairs, Program Coordinators, Dean, and Provost, indicating that campus program review expectations have been met. The Provost then issues the Close of Cycle memo.
• Graduate programs - The Review Officer issues a letter to Department Chairs, Program Coordinators, Dean, Provost, and the University Graduate Committee (UGC) indicating that campus program review expectations have been met. After the UGC review, the Provost issues the Close of Cycle memo.

Annual Assessment

Each department or degree program at Fresno State is required to submit an annual assessment report on September 30.  These reports are submitted to your College Assessment Coordinator and to University Faculty Director of Assessment Dr. Douglas Fraleigh. The reports are evaluated by the Learning Assessment Team. The University Faculty Director of Assessment reports the results to the Vice Provost and ultimately the Provost, and this team follows up if there are concerns about any of the reports.  

The Program Review Coordinator does not track annual reports. Departments discuss assessment in their Program Review self-study in section IIIB1. There are no specific requirements for how the assessment is discussed, though a copy of your SOAP is to be included in Appendix C. The review team and others (e.g., Vice Provost, Provost) determine whether additional assessment activities should be incorporated into the action plan.