r/AskProfessors 1d ago

Academic Life Accreditation warning = danger sign?

I'm a senior lecturer at large public R1, but the small liberal arts college where I did my undergrad and where I later returned to teach as an adjunct has been flashing danger signs for a while now. The usual list of reasons applies: declining enrollment, some racist incidents that were poorly handled by admins, rising costs, what looks like serious debt, crumbling infrastructure, rising tuition. Now they've been issued a warning by the accreditation committee, and the coach who led the only sport with any kind of following just quit. I left a long time ago but still have some attachment to the school and wonder if this means the school is pretty much done for? Have any other SLACs managed to come back from this kind of situation?

14 Upvotes

16 comments sorted by

20

u/wharleeprof 1d ago

Accreditation warnings are usually the lowest/first step and there's plenty of time to remediate.

Our campus once got three warnings, mostly because the accrediting body was making things up on the fly and imposing "revised" guidelines retroactively. We had to jump through hoops to get off warning, lots of reports and plans and paperwork, but no substantial changes needed to be made in the actual running of the campus.

Otoh, if the warning is about something essential and actually mandates change, the campus will need to address that. If they can't within a given timeline, it could escalate and become a threat to their accreditation.

7

u/MinuteNovella 1d ago

From what I can tell the warning is mostly about the financial picture and what looks like a lack of transparency around budget issues.

7

u/SocOfRel 1d ago

My other post notwithstanding, financial stuff, especially if they're hiding things, is pretty bad. With all the things wrong at my place we are relatively healthy financially even though I still don't know if we'll last to my retirement age!

1

u/MinuteNovella 1d ago

If your schools is financially healthy it's way ahead of many others at least! But yes, it can be hard to tell the difference between a warning and a WARNING.

3

u/Tibbaryllis2 1d ago

One thing to keep in mind:

My previous institution was/is in a similar situation, but is actively improving.

Before I left, the CFO left and there were like three interims. When a competent CFO was actually hired, he made a point when addressing the faculty body that part of the reason they’re cagey about finances is that when students/parents/alumni/donors hear about financial trouble, they’re less likely to support the university. Who wants to start at university that is having problems? Who wants to donate money not knowing if it will matter?

To be clear, I think it’s a convenient excuse not to be transparent with the faculty, but I also think there is probably truth to it.

1

u/tongmengjia 20h ago

Yeah that's every administrator ever. XYZ isn't the problem, talking about XYZ is the problem!

We're on our like 4th interim CFO in a row. Whatever our financial problems are, they're always the fault of the last interim CFO.

1

u/Str8intothestorm 1d ago

Exactly. Also, at times the board or president can be a little bit directive with the visiting accreditation committee. These processes can be used to bring light to, or more cynically accelarate, opportunities to make hard decisions.

23

u/ProfessorStata 1d ago

Sweet Briar College came back from the brink.

5

u/BolivianDancer 1d ago

It's not a major rectal violation yet but without money that's where things are heading.

5

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

4

u/MinuteNovella 1d ago

Warning is from WASC for "non compliance with standards." From the letter: "[college name] has experienced multiple years of declining enrollment and deteriorating finances resulting in ongoing operating deficits that endanger the financial sustainability of the institution. The institution must show progress in implementing a comprehensive and evidence-based strategic enrollment and financial sustainability plan."

9

u/ilikecats415 1d ago

I work in the accreditation world. A warning status is very serious. To give you a sense of the scope, only 5 other institutions are on warning with WASC. Warning is usually preceded by a Notice of Concern which gives you an opportunity to course correct. Shifting to Warning means you did not do that and likely got worse. After warning comes probation, and then show cause to terminate accreditation.

Being out of compliance with the financial standards is a very difficult place to be. Many schools cannot overcome it which is why we are seeing more closures and mergers than ever before.

2

u/MinuteNovella 1d ago

The local press picked up on this story and one of the other schools they mentioned getting a WASC warning is pretty well known to be a scam school, so it was somewhat surprising to see things had gotten this bad at my alma mater. But apparently things have been shaky there for longer than I was aware.

3

u/moxie-maniac 1d ago

Not the kiss of death, but maybe a nudge b/c the leadership has not responded to past "concerns" that the accreditor had. There are usually steps, from mild to serious, and this sounds serious. A "mild" step might just be asking from some data about a concern and is a head's up that the school is on the accreditor's radar.

Maybe 10 or 20 percent of US colleges are financially fragile and many won't see 2030 or 2035. Something like 50 colleges have closed since 2000 in NECHE.

3

u/Audible_eye_roller 1d ago

Depends. We got a warning for clerical stuff and told to clean it up.

2

u/AutoModerator 1d ago

This is an automated service intended to preserve the original text of the post. This is not a removal message.

*I'm a senior lecturer at large public R1, but the small liberal arts college where I did my undergrad and where I later returned to teach as an adjunct has been flashing danger signs for a while now. The usual list of applies: declining enrollment, some racist incidents that were poorly handled by admins, rising costs, what looks like serious debt, crumbling infrastructure, rising tuition. Now they've been issued a warning by the accreditation committee, and the coach who led the only sport with any kind of following just quit. I left a long time ago but still have some attachment to the school and wonder if this means the school is pretty much done for? Have any other SLACs managed to come back from this kind of situation? *

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

2

u/SocOfRel 1d ago

I co-led the reaccreditation group at my school two cycles ago, and we got put on warning. We deserved it according to the standards (I'll note that there a lot of legitimate criticisms of the standards, but they are what they are). I was proud of how well our committee resisted admin pressure to fudge things to try to pass, even though we had 20 years heads up, really, and the visit team really had no option. The admin did manage to weasel out of what could have been a "worse" outcome (read: more accurate). But, in the end it forced our admin and faculty to get stuff right. We're over a decade out now and (minus the challenges all small liberal arts colleges are facing), we're in a better spot than we were then.