W150 CHAIR William A. Ladusaw University groan/mm, Santa Cru: VICE CHAIR Margaret Kasimatis loyoln University Jeffrey California State University, San Luis Janna Bersi Cali/0min Strife University, Dominguez Hills Richard Bray Accrediting Commission for Schools lilr?ASC Linda Buckley University oft/w Paci?c Ronald L. Carter Lorna Lindn Li'niversity William Covino California Stats University, Los Ange/es Christopher T. Cross Pulilir Member Reed Dasenbrock University of Hawaii at Manon Phillip Doolittle Brondinan University lohn Etchemendy Stanford University Margaret Gaston Pulilir Member Erin Gore Public Member Dianne F. Harrison California State University, Nortliridgc Barbara Karlin Golden Gate University Linda Katehi University of California, Davis Adrianna Kezar University ofSontliern California Fernando Leon-Garcia CETYS University Devorah Lieberman University of La Verne Kay Llovio William Irissup University Stephen Privett, University ofSim Barry Ryan United States University Sharon Salinger University of California, Irvine Sandra Serrano Arcrediting Connuissionfor Community and Colleges Tomoko Takahashi Solm University 0] America Ramon Torrecilha California State University. Dominguez Hills lane Wellrnan Public Leah Williams Public Member PRESIDENT Mary Ellen Petrisko 985 Atlantic Avenue Suite 100, Alameda, CA 94501 . Sen/0r College and University Commission July 8, 2016 Dr. Paul Ague President San Diego Christian College 200 Riverview Parkway Santee, CA 92071 Dear Dr. Aguc: This letter serves as formal noti?cation and of?cial record of action taken concerning San Diego Christian College (SDC) by the WASC Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC) at is meeting June 22-24, 2016. This action was taken after consideration of the report of the review team that conducted the Accreditation Visit to SDC March 2-4, 2016. The Commission also reviewed the institutional report and exhibits submitted by SDC prior to the Offsite Review (OSR), the supplemental materials requested by the team after the OSR, and the institution?s April 22, 2016 response to the team. report. The Commission appreciated the opportunity to discuss the visit with you and your colleagues: Dr. Jon DePriest, Academic Vice President; Ms. Lundie Carstensen, and Mr. Steve Chaney, CFO. Your comments were very helpful in informing the Commission?s deliberations. The date of this action constitutes the effective date of the institution?s new status with WSCUC. Actions y?s Receive the Accreditation Visit team report 2. Reaf?rm accreditation for a period of eight years Schedule the next reaf?rmation review with the Offsite Review in fall 2023 and the Accreditation Visit in spring 2024 4. Schedule the Mid-Cycle Review in spring 2020 5. Schedule a Special Visit in spring 2019 to address the ?ve recommendations from the team report: a. The completion of all co-curricular reviews and establishment of a regular cycle of assessment b. The integration of administrative technology systems c. Efforts to track diverse students and to identify strategies for engagement and intervention to promote retention, persistence, and graduation d. The tracking of ?nancial health and the application of the ?ve-year budget forecasting tool; oversight of the admissions and ?nancial aid functions U) . E-FAX: 510.995.1477 - Commission Action Letter San Diego Christian College luly 8, 201 6 Page 2 of 3 C. The balance of resource needs for established programs with resource needs for planned growth in programs; resourcing of existing academic and student service programs. Commendations The Commission commends San Diego Christian College in particular for the following: 1. A noteworthy and highly dedicated president, widely respected throughout the institution, as well as an engaged, well-informed, and high-performing trustee board passionately dedicated to the success of SDC The successful move of the college, under challenging circumstances, to an attractive and practical new physical plant cementing the identity of the institution and providing new opportunities for growth and community engagement The institution?s engagement with and communication of its mission. Faculty, staff, and students present an inclusive faith?based environment where individuals feel cared for and valued. Embracing WSCUC reaf?rmation for accreditation as a bene?cial, value-added process for institutional improvement A meaningful, living strategic plan with initiatives broadly incorporated throughout the daily operations and activities of the entire institution. Recommendations The Commission identi?es the following issues for further development: 1. Following unsuccessful attempts over past years to institutionalize and regularize cocurricular reviews, it is critical that SDC take immediate steps to complete all overdue reviews and continue to carry-out future co-curricular assessment processes on the established cycle. (CFRs 2.7, 2.11) SDC should continue to press forward with the in-process efforts to integrate administrative technology systems that can provide ef?cient access, summarization, and reporting of the institutional information critical to data informed decision-making across the Institution. (CFRs 3.5, 4.2) SDC should engage teams such as the Multicultural Committee and the Enrollment and Retention Committee in the use of data to track diverse students (domestic and international) and to identify strategies for engagement and intervention to promote retention, persistence, and graduation. (CFRs 1.4, 2.2a, 2. 0) SDC should continue to closely monitor the 5-year budget forecasting tool and the overall ?nancial health of the College, as demonstrated by self-identi?ed Key Performance Indicators, such as the CFI and USDE composite score. In addition, the Institution is urged to closely monitor, and re?ne as appropriate, the recent personnel and process changes initiated to address oversight of Admissions and Financial Aid. (CFRS 3.4, 3.6, 3.7) Commission Action Letter San Diego Christian College quy 8, 201 6 Page 3 of 3 5. SDC should carefully balance its vision and planning for future programmatic expansion with the present foundational need to adequately equip current personnel and the need to resource existing academic and student service programs. (CFRs 3.3, 3.5, and 3.7) In taking this action to reaf?rm accreditation, the Commission con?rms that SDC has addressed the three Core Commitments and has successfully completed the two-stage institutional review process conducted under the 2013 Standards of Accreditation. Between this action and the time of the next review for reaf?rmation, the institution is encouraged to continue its progress, particularly with respect to student learning and success. In accordance with Commission policy, a copy of this letter will be sent to the chair of governing board in one week. The Commission expects that the team report and this action letter will be posted in a readily accessible location on the SDC website and widely distributed throughout the institution to promote further engagement and improvement and to support the institution's response to the speci?c issues identi?ed in these documents. The team report and the Commission?s action letter will also be posted. on the WSCUC website. If the institution wishes to respond to the Commission action on its own website, WSCUC will post a link to that response on the WSCUC website. Finally, the Commission wishes to express its appreciation for the extensive work that SDC undertook in preparing for and supporting this accreditation review. WSCUC is committed to an accreditation process that adds value to institutions while contributing to public accountability, and we thank you for your continued support of this process. Please contact me if you have any questions about this letter or the action of the Commission. Sincerely, WM Mary Ellen Petrisko President MEP/cno Cc: William Ladusaw, Commission Chair Lundie Carstensen, ALO Rob Zing}, Board Chair Members of the Accreditation Visit team Christopher Oberg, Vice President