The three candidates are Kelly Sullivan Holland, Frank Harris, and Tim Skinner.
Ms. Curris moved for the adoption of PR3, with a second by Mr. Mobley. It passed without
G. Proposed Revisions to the Goveming Regulations (PR4)
President Capilouto began by stating that as part ofthe SACS review, the accreditation
review, there were going to be recommendations for some stylistic changes in our Goveming
Regulations. He asked Provost Subbaswamy and Vice President for Institutional Research Heidi
Anderson to make a presentation first regarding SACS, before the forrnal motion and action.
Provost Subbaswamy yielded to Vice President Heidi Anderson.
Vice President for Institutional Research Heidi Anderson thanked President Capilouto, the
Board of Trustees, Provost Subbaswamy, and guests for the invitation. She explained that she would
like to try to do two things: l) give a refresher on accreditation and SACS, and 2) roles and
responsibilities ofthe individuals here at the University.
She explained that the goal of accreditation is to make sure institutions assure quality along
all areas ofthe accrediting body. It is done to ensure that students and parents are aware ofthe
standards that the institutions have met. There are four different types of accrediting bodies in the
United States. The University of Kentucky complies with standards by the regional accreditor,
Southem Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), as well as, over 80 different programmatic
accreditors. These are individuals who look at specialty groups such as Pharrnacy, Engineering,
Business, etc. Another role that accreditation does is to make sure that the University is able to
receive federal funds and our students can receive federal financial aid. In addition, as our students
graduate, it allows employers to have the confidence that the graduates have come from a quality
program. It also smoothes the transition process of individual students who transfer from different
Vice President Anderson then reviewed some ofthe mandates that SACS expects of the
University. The first being a commitment to key areas such as student leaming, thus we have student
leaming outcomes. SACS also wants to ensure that the University is enhancing quality throughout
all of our programs and that we engage in a continuous improvement system. Finally, SACS reviews
the University by having us prepare what is called the Compliance Certification Report. This report
has three categories: Core Requirements, Comprehensive Standards, and Federal Requirements.
There are over eighty (80) of these particular standards and the University must supply, not only a
written narrative of how we comply with those, but documentation.
SACS uses a multi-phase process. The first step is the University’s preparation ofthe
Compliance Certification Report. The University is in the middle of that preparation and it will be
submitted on September l0, 20l2. After SACS receives our report, they will give it to an off-site
committee in November of 20l2. That committee will review the report, where it may find certain
areas not compliant or compliant.