STATEMENT OF ACCREDITATION STATUS

CHEYNEY UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
1837 University Circle
P. O. Box 200
Cheyney, PA 19319-0200
Phone: (610) 399-2000; Fax: (610) 399-2415
www.cheyney.edu

Chief Executive Officer: Mr. Aaron Walton, Interim President
System: Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education Central Office
Mr. Frank Brogan, Chancellor
Dixon University Center
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Phone: (717) 720-4000; Fax: (717) 720-4011
INSTITUTIONAL INFORMATION
Enrollment (Headcount): 709 Undergraduate; 37 Graduate
Control: Public
Affiliation: Government-State Systems- Unit of PA System of Higher Education
2015 Carnegie Classification: Baccalaureate Colleges - Arts & Sciences Focus
Approved Credential Levels: Bachelor's, Postbaccalaureate Award/Cert/Diploma (Trauma Informed Education Studies - TIES), Master's;
Distance Education Programs: Not Approved
Accreditors Recognized by U.S. Secretary of Education: n/a
Instructional Locations
Branch Campuses: None
Additional Locations: Philadelphia Urban Site, Philadelphia, PA
Other Instructional Sites: Pennsylvania Avenue School, Atlantic City, NJ
ACCREDITATION INFORMATION
Status: Member since 1951
Last Reaffirmed: November 20, 2014

Most Recent Commission Action:
June 22, 2017: To accept the monitoring report and to note the visit by the Commission's representatives. To require the institution to show cause, by September 1, 2017, as to why its accreditation should not be withdrawn. To note that the institution remains accredited while on show cause. To direct a prompt liaison guidance visit to discuss Commission expectations. The institution is required to present its case for continued accreditation by means of a show cause report documenting evidence that the institution has achieved and can sustain ongoing compliance with Requirement of Affiliation 8 (Documented Financial Resources), Standard 2 (Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal), Standard 3 (Institutional Resources), and Standard 5 (Administration). An on-site evaluation will follow submission of the report. The purpose of the on-site evaluation is to verify the information provided in the institution's show cause report and the institution's ongoing and sustainable compliance with the Commission's accreditation standards. To request that the show cause report document evidence that the institution has achieved and can sustain ongoing compliance with Commission standards including, but not limited to documented evidence the institution has: (1) documented financial resources, funding base, and plans for financial development adequate to support its educational purposes and programs and to assure long-term financial stability (Requirement of Affiliation 8); (2) developed, implemented, and widely communicated a resource allocation strategy that is clearly aligned with the institution's strategic priorities and includes a clear description of resource allocation strategies and a means of assessing the effectiveness of these strategies ; (3) developed plans to initiate a strategic planning process that will reflect the institution's mission and goals as they may be redefined by the work of existing task forces (Standard 2); (4) developed and implemented a financial plan that provides for annual and multi-year budget projections, utilizes planning and assessment documents, and addresses both near- and longer-term resource acquisition and debt reduction (Standard 3); (5) initiated a process to hire permanent campus leadership to address the significant issues they face and to ensure progress and stability of the campus. (Standard 5) To further request that the show cause report include the following data for the three most recent years available: Title IV cohort default rates; USDE Financial Responsibility Composite Scores; and the institution's status with regard to Heightened Cash Monitoring with USDE. To also request that the institution complete and submit for approval, by September 1, 2017, a written teach-out plan describing how, if the Commission withdraws accreditation, students will be accommodated. In accordance with Commission policy and federal regulations, the teach-out plan must provide for the equitable treatment of students to complete their education, and include any teach-out agreements that the institution has entered into or intends to enter into with another institution. Approvals from any licensing, regulatory, or other legal entities, as may be necessary, must also be provided to the Commission.

Brief History Since Last Comprehensive Evaluation:
November 20, 2014: To reaffirm accreditation. To commend the institution for the quality of the self-study process and report. To request a progress report due October 1, 2015 documenting (1) the development and implementation of clearly stated and widely communicated enrollment targets that are used for planning and resource allocation (Standard 2); (2) the development and implementation of a comprehensive facilities master plan and a multi-year technology plan (Standard 3); (3) steps taken to further implement an organized and sustainable assessment process to evaluate the extent to which all units achieve stated goals including evidence that assessment information is used to improve programs, services, and processes (Standard 7); and (4) further development, implementation, and documentation of an organized and sustained assessment process to evaluate and improve learning goals for distance learning courses including evidence that student learning assessment information is used to improve teaching and learning (Standard 14). The Periodic Review Report is due June 1, 2019.
September 4, 2015: To request a supplemental information report, due October 16, 2015, addressing recent developments at the University which may have implications for continued compliance with Standard 3 (Institutional Resources).
November 19, 2015: To accept the Supplemental Information Report.
November 19, 2015: To accept the progress report. To place the institution on probation because of insufficient evidence that the institution is currently in compliance with Standard 3 (Institutional Resources) and to request a monitoring report due September 1, 2016 documenting (1) the implementation of a technology plan; (2) the development and implementation of a long-term financial plan; (3) steps taken to strengthen the institution's finances; (4) updated cash and financial projections for the next five years. To further request that the monitoring report document steps taken to assure continuity and stability of institutional leadership (Standard 4); and the continued documentation and implementation of steps taken to use assessment results to improve programs and services. (Standard 7) A visit will follow submission of the monitoring report. To direct a prompt liaison guidance visit to discuss Commission expectations. To note that the institution remains accredited while on probation. To note that the date of the next evaluation visit will be established when accreditation is reaffirmed.
March 3, 2016: To note the visit by the Commission's representative. To remind the institution of the Commission's November 19, 2015 action placing the institution on probation because of insufficient evidence that the institution is in compliance with Standard 3 (Institutional Resources). To note that the institution remains accredited while on probation. To remind the institution of the monitoring report due September 1, 2016. The due date for the next evaluation visit will be established when accreditation is reaffirmed.
October 31, 2016: To acknowledge receipt of the substantive change request. To include the first post-baccalaureate certificate program (Trauma Informed Education Studies - TIES) within the scope of the institution's accreditation. To remind the institution of the Commission's November 19, 2015 action placing the institution on probation because of insufficient evidence that the institution is in compliance with Standard 3 (Institutional Resources). To note that the institution remains accredited while on probation. To note that the monitoring report due September 1, 2016 has been received and will be acted upon at the November 2016 Commission meeting. The due date for the next self-study evaluation will be established when accreditation is reaffirmed.
November 17, 2016: To accept the monitoring report and to note the visit by the Commission's representatives. To note the institution's progress in addressing concerns relative to Standard 4 (Leadership and Governance) and Standard 7 (Institutional Assessment). To continue the institution on probation due to insufficient evidence that it is in compliance with Standard 2 (Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal), Standard 3 (Institutional Resources), Standard 5 (Administration), and Requirement of Affiliation 8 (The institution has documented financial resources, funding base, and plans for financial development adequate to support its educational purposes and programs and to assure financial stability). To note that the institution remains accredited while on probation. To request a monitoring report due March 1, 2017, documenting evidence that the institution has (1) achieved and can sustain compliance with Standards 2 and 3, and Requirement of Affiliation 8 that includes, but is not limited to, evidence of the development and implementation of an inclusive budget process that has been fully communicated to all of the appropriate constituent groups; revised multi-year budgets, including evidence-supported enrollment assumptions for each year, and comprehensive fundraising and debt repayment plans; and (2) developed and implemented a comprehensive administrative structure and organizational chart that includes all key positions, clearly defines all reporting relationships and decision making authority granted to each position identified (Standard 5). A small team visit will follow submission of the monitoring report. To direct a prompt liaison guidance visit to discuss Commission expectations. To remind the institution, in compliance with Federal regulations, of its responsibility to resolve all of its accreditation issues within two calendar years of the date when the probation was first issued by the Commission.

Next Self-Study Evaluation:

Date Printed: July 28, 2017

DEFINITIONS

Branch Campus - A branch campus is a domestic or international location of an institution that is geographically apart, independent of the primary/main campus. The branch campus is considered independent of the main campus if it is permanent in nature; offers courses in educational programs leading to a degree, certificate, or other recognized educational credential; has its own faculty and administrative or supervisory organization; and has its own budgetary and hiring authority. (34 CFR §600.2)

Additional Location - An additional location is a domestic or international location, other than a branch campus, that is geographically apart from the primary/main campus and at which the institution offers at least 50 percent of the requirements of an educational program. (34 CFR §602.22) ANYA ("Approved but Not Yet Active") indicates that the location is included within the scope of accreditation but has not yet begun to offer courses. This designation is removed after the Commission receives notification that courses have begun at this location. ANYC ("Approved but Not Yet Closed") indicates that the institution has requested that the location be officially closed through the substantive change process. The location is currently included within the scope of accreditation but the institution will be stopping all operations at this location in the near future. The institution should inform the Commission (via email at sc@msche.org) of the date that operations cease. This designation is removed after the Commission receives notification that courses have stopped at this location and the location is no longer listed on the SAS.

Other Instructional Sites - MSCHE defines an other instructional site as any off-campus site, other than those meeting the definition of a branch campus or an additional location, at which the institution offers one or more courses for credit. Sites designated as an other instructional site do not require substantive change approval. However, substantive change approval is required to reclassify an other instructional site to or from a branch campus or additional location.

Distance Education Programs - Fully Approved, Approved (one program approved) or Not Approved indicates whether or not the institution has been approved to offer diploma/certificate/degree programs via distance education (programs for which students could meet 50% or more of the requirements of the program by taking distance education courses). Per the Commission's Substantive Change policy, Commission approval of the first two Distance Education programs is required to be "Fully Approved." If only one program is approved by the Commission, the specific name of the program will be listed in parentheses after "Approved."

Commission actions are explained in the policy Accreditation Actions.