National Site Team Chair Training November 6, 2009 Atlanta, Georgia

1. National Site Team Chair Training November 6, 2009 Atlanta, Georgia

2. National Site Team Chair Training Participants today: The Accreditation Commission National Site Team Chairs Regional Directors

3. National Site Team Chair Training This training will: Outline impetus for change Detail process of shift to national training Describe a change in philosophy and culture Describe the process Outline expectations for national site team chairs Provide case study brainstorming

4. Impetus for Change Impetus for change was the Presidential Taskforce to streamline and shorten the accreditation process, to: • Provide greater consistency in site visits • Reduce the length of time for reviews • Remove regional review • Shorten report receipt times • Move to national reviewer quickly • Increase collaboration and collegiality

5. The Historical Perspective Accreditation, not certification Continuing process of identity and maturity Taskforce-driven changes Focus toward mutuality and collegiality Use of proven ACPE educational methods Relational model of continuous adult education

6. Basic Focus of Philosophy • Moving away from “us/them” • Moving toward mutuality

7. The Center is the nexus of the Site Visit Each Center: • Describes its uniqueness • Expresses its narrative and context • Demonstrates compliance with Standards • Invites and accepts feedback and insight

8. The Site Team serves the Center and ACPE Site team is: • Facilitator—of context and Center-centricity • Supporter—of the Center and of ACPE • Encourager—of the supervisor and the process • Challenger—of integration of theory and practice • Reviewer—of compliance and uniqueness • Advocate—of continued success

9. The Imperative for the Site Visit Thus, the site visit: • Provides for collaboration and collegiality • Captures unique, creative work of the Center • Supports the work with students and institution • Undergirds Center importance for the institution • Affirms Standard compliance • Challenges Standard non-compliance

10. The Parallel Process in Site Visits The Parallel Process: • Problem with helping and being helped • The track of learning—the rails of identification, projection • Student, patient, supervisor, administration are interacting whether seen or not: the Site Team may see, humbly. • Center identifies with its context and projects the need on the Site Visit: the Site Team spots the projection and helps the Center see how to reflect on its work effectively.

11. Site Team Functioning: Three Scenarios Scenario One: A Site Team finds an under-functioning supervisor and completes study to be helpful or pastoral to the supervisor and Center • The Site Team does most of the work. The program continues to under-function. The next review is problematic. • Does the supervisor know who administration is and how to get its support? Does the supervisor know how to manage up and down? • Does the Site Team and/or the regional accreditation committee recognize problem and assist the supervisor with outside insight, consultation, collaboration, and support, instead of over-functioning?

12. Site Team Functioning: Three Scenarios Scenario Two: Site team finds under-functioning supervisor with incomplete material and inadequate responses. The Site Team refuses to complete the self study. • The Site Team returns inadequate material, advises regional accreditation committee chair of mentoring opportunity for Center. • The supervisor has the opportunity to function up. • The Site Team awaits a completed self study and uses the site visit to assist the Center in achieving accredited status.

13. The Site Team Functioning: Three Scenarios Scenario Three: The Site Team encounters the helpless projection of the supervisor. • The Site Team expects the supervisor to complete the work, and so returns incomplete material to the Center, awaits complete material, and reschedules site visit in collaboration with regional accreditation committee chair and Center supervisor. • The Center uses mentorship from regional accreditation committee, along with teaching and coaching of Site Team during visit. • By such intervention, the supervisor learns how to manage the CPE program better.

14. Mutuality and Accreditation Competent Supervisors: • Serve administrators and students. • Serve the profession and the program. • Listen to students’ learning needs, met and unmet. • Seek site team feedback to improve and make changes. • Celebrate good work. Competent Site Teams: • Look for system dynamics and themes. • Recognize parallels and give feedback. • See learning needs of students & supervisor, met and unmet. • Listen more than they speak. • Have courage, with humility, to say what they see.

15. When Centers Resist Mutuality Site teams will: • Return incomplete material for further work • Rely on fundamentals of meeting Standards • Access checklists • Resist reactivity • Encourage feedback to Standards Committee • Recommend: • notations • adverse actions

16. Types of Site Visits Using National Site Team Chairs Ten Year Re-accreditation visits Site Visits to potential new member Centers Using Commissioners as Chairs Called Reviews Using Regional Site Visit Chairs New Candidacy Centers Site Visits for Supervisory CPE, Component Sites, Satellite Programs (as needed)

17. The Role of the National Site Team Chair Conflicts of Interest Refrain from consulting until Commission vote Note ineligibility with consulted Centers Disclose all relationships Refuse gifts or benefits Refrain from recruiting staff until one year post-site visit

18. The Role of the National Site Team Chair Pre-Visit Responsible to the Accreditation Commission Avoids conflicts of interest Leads the Site Team and its process Determines suitability of material Forms site teams with regional accreditation chair Educates site team members Creates visit agenda with Center supervisor Negotiates arrangements for visit Reviews Center material with site team

19. The Role of the National Site Team Chair During the Visit Meets with site team prior to visit, on site Re-educates site team as necessary Manages accountability of the site team Assures all portions of review are complete Makes initial report to Center at close of visit

20. The Role of the National Site Team Chair To the Commission Chair Forwards Center documents to Commission Chair Manages Site Team evaluation of Site Team Chair Ensures Center evaluation of Site Team Chair is received by Commission

21. The Role of the National Site Team Chair After the Visit Prepares Site Visit Report—Part I within 14 days Receives Center response within 30 days after it receives Site Visit Report—Part I Prepares Site Visit Report—Part II for delivery to Center and Commission Chair Assures feedback is received

22. A Word About the Quality of Reports Professional quality Accurate representation of visit Publication-grade material

23. Focus of Student Handbooks Student handbooks are created: to give students what they need to have a consistent CPE process to meet ACPE Standards

24. The Role of the Regional Accreditation Committee Chair In Regard to Site Visits Forms team with National Site Team Chair Supports development of Site Team Members Provides consultation/mentoring to Centers Maintains communication with Centers Receives material from Site Visit Teams

25. The Role of Site Team Members Conflicts of Interest Refrain from consulting until Commission vote Note ineligibility with some Centers Disclose all relationships Refuse gifts or benefits Refrain from recruiting staff for one year after visit

26. The Role of Site Team Members Competency • Maintain working knowledge of ACPE matters • Act in ethical manner at all times • Seek continuing education about accreditation • Work with the National Site Team Chair • Mentor new Site Team members • Share feedback with Accreditation Commission • About National Site Team Chair • About process

27. Hearing a Center’s Story ACPE Standards: foundational for Center stories Each Center story is unique Accreditation process is the Center’s action/ reflection on its work Site Teams “willingly suspend disbelief” to understand Center issues—kenosis “Center-centric” variations: valued and challenged

28. The Site Team Visit • Led by National Site Team Chair • Demonstrates: • Familiarity with Center programs • Thorough examination of all material • Professionalism and courtesy • Allows sufficient time for complete review • Team participation in all review aspects

29. Expectations of Site Team Conduct Dress professionally Prompt in attendance and responsiveness Exercise tact, collegiality, and professionalism Maintain confidentiality Maintain pastoral identity with Center Challenge appropriately Use ethical financial practices

30. Training of New Site Team Members Responsibility of National Site Team Chair and Regional Accreditation Committee Chair Use mentorship model Use feedback from Center, Chairs, Commission

31. Evaluation of Site Team Members Center Site Visit Questionnaire Site Team Peer Evaluation Chair’s evaluation using Peer/Self-Evaluation Review by the Accreditation Commission

32. Removal from Service Violation of ACPE Code of Ethics Change in eligibility Substandard performance Failure to participate in education Continued unavailability for visits Consistent complaints in site visits Consistent late submission of reports

33. Scheduling the Site Visit • Usually two full days, including travel • May extend to additional days for larger Centers • Travel in accordance with ACPE/regional policies • Work with regional chair of accreditation • Coordination by Chair with Team and Center

34. Review of Documents Receive material thirty (30) days before site visit Examine material thoroughly using Standards Note areas of concern or confusion Discuss material as a team via e-mail/phone Sketch preliminary Site Visit Report—Part I

35. Development of Agenda Site Team Chair creates the agenda in cooperation with primary Center Supervisor Ensure that required interviews are scheduled Provide time for team consultation Allow sufficient time for review and report

36. On-Site Preliminary Team Meeting Meet prior to contact with Center supervisor or personnel to clarify issues and plan visit Review team assignments Identify areas of concern Review agenda

37. Conducting the Site Visit Follow the established agenda Look for strengths an limitations Consider Center context in meeting Standards Maintain clear boundaries regarding internal Center matters of concern

38. Conducting Interviews Verify information in material Clarify information in material Seek additional information not in material Clarify any discrepancies Keep notes of interviews for later reporting

39. Site Visit Report—Part I All work prior to Commission vote is consultative! Use forms in Policy & Procedure Manual Base conclusions on fact, not on impression Cite specific Standards Site Visit Report—Part I due 14 days after site visit

40. SITE VISIT REPORT – Part I CENTER: DATE(S) OF VISIT: CENTER ADDRESS: CENTER SUPERVISOR(S): SITE TEAM CHAIR: TEAM MEMBERS: 1. Check List: Material Submitted and Fees Paid (refer also to checklist for in the Accreditation Manual) Face Sheet __ Statement from ACPE that Center is in good financial standing __ Statement from region that Center is in good financial standing __ Self Study/Feasibility Document Annual Reports (up to 4 years) Action Reports from Prior Reviews Student Handbook Accreditation Questionnaire Accreditation Review Criteria Document 2. Describe the site team’s pre-visit orientation to its role and responsibilities and actions taken to familiarize the team with ACPE standards and accreditation procedures. 3. Briefly summarize the history and current description of the Center, including the pastoral care program/department. 4. Briefly summarize the Center’s prior accreditation history. What deficiencies and/or notations were assigned? What concerns were identified? How were concerns, deficiencies, and notations addressed? 5. Assess the Center’s self study/feasibility study process and the resulting document. 6. Describe each component of the site visit. 7. List strengths and limitations of the Center and programs. Include: a) an assessment of the Center’s financial viability to offer programs of CPE as reflected in financial audit statements; b) a description/assessment of measurement of students’ achievement after CPE (Level I/Level II) and Supervisory CPE. 8. Summarize the standards issues needing to be addressed by the Center in its response to the site team preliminary report. Within 14 days from site visit, complete Part I and send it to the Center. Copy the regional accreditation chair and the Chair of the Accreditation Commission.

41. Center Response All work prior to Commission vote is consultative! Due within 30 days of receipt of Site Visit Report—Part I Encourage complete response Site Team discusses by e-mail/phone

42. Site Visit Report—Part II • All work prior to Commission vote is consultative! • Use form in Policy & Procedure Manual • Standards not met? Recommend notations/deficiencies: • Note areas of insufficiency • Cite specific Standards • If commendations are recommended: • Note areas of excellence • Cite specific Standards

43. SITE VISIT REPORT—Part II CENTER: DATE(S) OF VISIT: Complete this section after receiving the Center response to Site Visit Report—Part I. 1. Comment on the Center’s written response to the site team visit and Part I Site Visit Report. Assess the Center’s compliance or feasibility for compliance (candidacy) with ACPE Standards. Include Accreditation Manual, Appendix 5, A and B and make additional comments if necessary to document points of non-compliance. 2. Summarize specific issues for discussion by the Accreditation Commission. 3. Prepare a separate document, listing any commendations (See Appendix 3: Commendations for Centers) that may be appropriate for the Center. Describe the portion of the Center’s documentation, operations, or program design and execution found to be exemplary. Specific Standards must be cited for commendations. 4. Give a recommendation for action to the Accreditation Commission. Cite specific standards when recommending non-compliance, deficiencies or notations. 5. Record the site visit team’s vote on its recommendation for action. Combine Site Visit Report Part I, the Center Response, Site Visit Report Part II, all Center materials and correspondence, and any recommendations for commendation(s) and submit to the Chair, Accreditation Commission, for assignment to a national reviewer. Send a copy of the Site Visit Report, Part II, to the Center and the regional chair of accreditation. NOTE: Any recommendations for commendation(s) are shared only with the regional chair of accreditation and the Chair of the Accreditation Commission. They are not to be made available to the Center.

44. A Note about Commendations Commendation: an honor and acknowledgement of excellence as recognition of superiority. By definition, they are rare. Created in a separate document. Not shared with Center. Tied to a specific Standard.

45. Review by National Reviewer • All work prior to Commission vote is consultative! • Thorough review of all materials. • Recommendations to Commission for: • Continued or New Accredited Membership • With or without notations • With or without commendations

46. National Site Team Chair Follow-Up Chair follows up with feedback from Center Reports feedback to Commission Chair Receives fee for service

47. Case Study: Responsible Compliance 300.1 All ACPE Centers shall maintain compliance with the ACPE Standards, reports, procedures and fees as detailed in the ACPE Accreditation Manual. Accredited Centers are also responsible for submitting student units reports to ACPE within 45 days of the end of each unit. Reports are filed electronically through the members-only section of the ACPE website (www.acpe.edu). Copies are forwarded automatically to the regional director. A notation for Standard 300.1 will be assigned for late reports.

48. Case Study: Auditor’s Statement 302.1 financial, human and physical resources sufficient to support the units of CPE offered by the Center.

49. Case Study: How Many Policies? Centers may include policies and procedures that go beyond the expectations of the ACPE Standards 2010, but the policies and procedures of an Accredited Member Center must include: Access to ACPE standards and commissions’ manuals (Standard 303.7) Access to library, other resources (Standard 303.6) Admissions (Standard 304.1) Agreement for training (Standard 304.9) Complaints (Standard 304.3) Completion of unit in progress if supervisor unable to continue (Standard 304.10) Consultation (Standard 304.5) Discipline, dismissal and withdrawal (Standard 304.6) Ethical conduct for students consistent with ACPE standards (Standard 304.7) Maintenance of student records (Standard 304.4) Supervisor’s evaluation (Standard 308.8.1) Financial—fees, benefits, etc. (304.2) Students’ rights and responsibilities (304.8)

50. Case Study: What’s a Library? 303.6 access to library and educational facilities adequate to meet the ACPE standards.