Higher Learning Commission Accreditation Requirements

Foundational to the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) criteria and core components is a set of practices shared by institutions of higher education in the United States. Unlike the criteria for accreditation, these assumed practices are (1) generally matters to be determined as facts, rather than matters requiring professional judgment and (2) not expected to vary by institutional mission. Every institution is expected to be in compliance with all assumed practices at all times.

Assumed practices fall into four categories:

1. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
2. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources, and Support
3. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
4. Resources, Planning and Institutional Effectiveness

The full list of assumed practices can be accessed on the Higher Learning Commission website.

The criteria for accreditation convey the standards of quality by which HLC determines whether an institution merits accreditation or reaffirmation of accreditation. Recognition of the widely varying institutional missions across HLC’s membership is essential to these criteria as standards of quality.

There are four criteria and 18 related core components for accreditation:

Criterion 1. Mission: The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the institution’s operations.

• 1.A. Mission Alignment
• 1.B. Mission and Public Good
• 1.C. Mission and Diversity of Society

Criterion 2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct: In fulfilling its mission, the institution acts with integrity; its conduct is ethical and responsible.

• 2.A. Integrity
• 2.B. Transparency
• 2.C. Board Governance
• 2.D. Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression
• 2.E. Knowledge Acquisition, Discovery and Application

Criterion 3. Teaching and Learning for Student Success: The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments and support services, and it evaluates their effectiveness in fulfilling its mission. The rigor and quality of each educational program is consistent regardless of modality, location or other differentiating factors.

• 3.A. Educational Programs
• 3.B. Exercise of Intellectual Inquiry
• 3.C. Sufficiency of Faculty and Staff
• 3.D. Support for Student Learning and Resources for Teaching
• 3.E. Assessment of Student Learning
• 3.F. Program Review
• 3.G. Student Success Outcomes

Criterion 4. Sustainability: Institutional Effectiveness, Resources and Planning: The institution’s resources, structures, policies, procedures and planning enable it to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its educational programs, and respond to future challenges and opportunities.

• 4.A. Effective Administrative Structures
• 4.B. Resource Base and Sustainability
• 4.C. Planning for Quality Improvement

The complete criteria for accreditation can be accessed on the Higher Learning Commission website.

HLC is required to assure that all member institutions comply with federal regulations -- some relate to specific HLC criteria and assumed practices. While NIU can be audited at any time, a formal review of NIU’s compliance is part of the comprehensive evaluation process. Compliance ensures that NIU remains eligible for federal financial aid.

Evidence demonstrating compliance with these federal regulations is reviewed during the federal compliance review component of the comprehensive evaluation:

1. Assignment of Credits, Program Length and Tuition (FDCR.A.10.020)
2. Institutional Records of Student Complaints (FDCR.A.10.030)
3. Periodic Review and Publication of Transfer (FDCR.A.10.040)
4. Institutional Practices for Verification of Student Identity and Protection of Student Privacy (FDCR.A.10.050)
5. Title IV Program Responsibilities (FDCR.A.10.060)
6. Disclosure of Student Achievement Information (FDCR.A.10.070)
7. Standing With States and Other Accreditors (FDCR.A.10.080)
8. Fraud and Abuse (FDCR.A.20.010)
9. Recruiting, Admissions and Related Enrollment Practices (FDCR.A.20.020)

Complete information on federal compliance requirements can be accessed on the Higher Learning Commission website.

NIU must provide supporting evidence that demonstrates how it meets HLC’s criteria for accreditation and the Federal Compliance requirements. Evidence should:

• Substantiate the facts and arguments presented in its institutional narrative.
• Respond to the prior peer review team’s concerns and recommendations.
• Explain any nuances specific to the institution.
• Strengthen the institution’s overall record of compliance with HLC’s requirements.
• Affirm the institution’s overall academic quality and financial sustainability and integrity.

According to Black’s Law, compelling evidence generally falls into three categories: clear, corroborating, and circumstantial.

Clear evidence is precise, explicit and tends to directly establish the point it is presented to support. Institutions should provide clear evidence of their compliance with each core component.

Example: Clear evidence that a president was duly appointed by an institution’s board would be a board resolution or meeting minutes showing a motion and vote to hire the president.

Corroborating evidence is supplementary to evidence already given and tends to strengthen or confirm it. This type of evidence can be useful in illustrating points made in the institution’s narrative, but it may not be persuasive to peer reviewers on its own.

Example: Corroborating evidence that a president was duly appointed by an institution’s board would be a copy of the offer letter addressed to the president.

Circumstantial evidence establishes a condition of surrounding circumstances, from which the principal fact may be inferred. This type of evidence is never sufficient on its own.

Example: Circumstantial evidence that a president was duly appointed by an institution’s board would be a copy of a letter from the president to the chair of the board, accepting the presidential appointment.

The HLC provides suggestions to assist institutions in thinking about possible sources of evidence in Providing Evidence for the Criteria for Accreditation (PDF).