Skip to content
Sign in
ACCPHE

Institutional Accreditation Standards and Quality Assurance Policies

A commitment to consistent, transparent, and evidence-based evaluation — applied to Christian and private institutions while recognizing differences in mission, delivery, size, and national regulatory environment.

Section 4.1 · Proposed Institutional Accreditation Standards

Twelve standards recommended for formal adoption by the Council

Institutions seeking accreditation demonstrate compliance through documented policies, operational evidence, institutional performance information, and the results of systematic self-evaluation.

Select a standard
Proposed standard 1 of 12

Institutional Mission and Identity

The institution shall maintain a clearly defined mission that informs its academic programs, strategic priorities, institutional policies, and educational activities.

Evaluation considerations

  • Published mission, vision, and institutional objectives.
  • Alignment between mission and academic operations.
  • Evidence of mission-based institutional planning.
  • Communication of institutional identity to stakeholders.
  • Periodic assessment of mission fulfillment.

Christian institutions should demonstrate consistency between their stated faith-based identity and their educational practices.

Section 4.2 · Criteria and Evidence

Demonstrating compliance

Institutions are expected to demonstrate compliance through reliable and verifiable evidence — institutional policies, governance documents, academic catalogs, faculty records, curriculum documents, student assessment results, financial reports, performance data, and quality assurance records.

The evaluation assesses both the existence of appropriate policies and evidence that those policies are implemented effectively.

Document submission alone does not establish compliance. Review considers the quality, consistency, authenticity, and practical application of the evidence provided.

Section 4.3 · Code of Ethics

Principles governing the Council’s work

ACCPHE is committed to promoting ethical conduct and professional responsibility throughout its institutional activities.

Integrity

Council representatives shall act honestly and avoid misrepresentation in all official activities.

Impartiality

Institutional evaluations shall be conducted objectively and without improper preference or prejudice.

Confidentiality

Nonpublic information obtained during evaluation shall be protected and disclosed only in accordance with approved policy and applicable law.

Conflict of Interest

Those involved in evaluation or decision-making shall disclose actual, potential, or perceived conflicts and recuse themselves when required.

Professional Competence

Reviewers and decision-makers shall undertake responsibilities for which they possess appropriate qualifications and expertise.

Transparency

The Council shall communicate its standards, procedures, decisions, and institutional classifications accurately.

Accountability

Council officials shall remain subject to appropriate oversight, ethical review, and corrective procedures.

Respect for Institutional Diversity

Evaluation shall recognize legitimate institutional differences while applying approved standards consistently.

Section 4.4 · Complaints and Appeals

Fairness, accountability, and due process

An orderly means of addressing concerns about Council procedures, institutional conduct, accreditation decisions, and potential breaches of established standards.

For any party

Complaints

Complaints should be submitted in writing and identify the institution or matter concerned, the nature of the alleged breach, relevant supporting information, and the complainant’s contact details.

The Council assesses whether the complaint falls within its jurisdiction and whether sufficient information exists to warrant further review. Where appropriate, the institution or individual concerned is given a fair opportunity to respond.

For institutions

Appeals

An institution subject to an appealable accreditation decision may request reconsideration under published procedures, reviewed by authorized individuals who were not responsible for the original decision.

The process identifies permissible grounds, submission requirements, deadlines, review procedures, and the authority responsible for the final determination.

Contact the Standards & Ethics Committee