Policy Details

Date of Last Update

Approved By
  • University Academic Senate / Provost

Responsible Office
Provost Office


Print Policy
Export Policy As PDF


SG 2.08

  1. Policy Statement
  2. Procedures
  3. History

Policy Statement

The decision to seek accreditation for a unit or program represents an investment and a commitment on the part of Grand Valley. The process of acquiring accreditation should be the result of a thoughtful, comprehensive analysis of both the benefits and the costs which result for the unit and the University community.

As part of the process for seeking the Grand Valley Administration’s approval to initiate the accreditation process, units need to make the case for accreditation to faculty governance. Both curricular and budgetary consequences of accreditation must be reviewed by the appropriate governance committees and recommendations forwarded to the Associate Vice-President for Academic Affairs responsible for accreditation issues before a formal decision to pursue accreditation can be made. 



1.  The unit seeking permission to pursue accreditation of the unit or of a program within that unit will make its case first to the College Curriculum Committee [CCC] of the College in which the unit is housed.  Upon completing its review of the proposal, the CCC will forward its recommendation to ECS.  ECS will refer the proposal to UCC and to FSBC for their recommendations. Upon receipt of the recommendations of UCC and FSBC, ECS will review the proposal for accreditation and forward a recommendation to the Associate Vice-President for Academic Affairs responsible for accreditation issues.  The Provost will notify ECS of the Administration’s decision regarding approval of the proposal to seek accreditation. An adverse recommendation at any level of governance will not terminate the process of discussion.

2.  The unit’s proposal to seek accreditation shall include a thorough assessment of the unit’s current degree of compliance with accreditation guidelines. This assessment should be detailed and specific, and it should indicate any anticipated changes required in order to achieve accreditation. This discussion should include, but is not limited to, changes in program objectives, courses, requirements, physical space and/or facilities, faculty resources, and University Libraries or other resources.

3.  A copy of the current accrediting agency guidelines shall be attached to the proposal.

4.  The proposal will include a candid and specific discussion of the anticipated short term and long-term (5-year) benefits and costs associated with accreditation. This discussion should speak to the following: students, graduates, the unit, the College, and the University.

5.  The proposal will include a specific discussion addressing how the unit believes that accreditation will enhance and facilitate the unit’s ability to function within the Grand Valley role and mission statement.

6.  The proposal will include an analysis of sources of financial support, and of the anticipated budgetary costs and benefits. This discussion will include a projected budget and be directed toward both the short term and long-term (5 years) impact. The budget should contain numbers which indicate costs for administrative, faculty, and support personnel, and any equipment or operating costs. Monetary support could include such items as any start-up or long-term grants, increased tuition and fee revenue based on anticipated number of students, and requested University funding. Whether internal funding will come from the present unit budget, the College budget, or the University should be specified.

Units which have achieved accreditation do not need to make the case for renewal of accreditation.  Implicit in the unit’s decision to pursue renewal is the presumption that accreditation has been beneficial.  At the renewal stage, however, the unit shall forward a brief statement to ECS/FSBC/UCC assessing the effects of accreditation during the foregoing period, and apprising ECS/FSBC/UCC of any changes in accreditation requirements or standards which may have been made since the previous review. This statement will include a projected budget for the next five years. Faculty governance will review this statement and will forward a recommendation to the Provost.


November 20, 2019 - updated with GLEV recommendations

January 7, 2019 - Retitled FH 2.04 O-P to SG 2.08

May 30, 2018 - Title changed from Accreditation Review Procedures & Process to Pursue Accreditation