June 15,2001

Dr. Adriana D. Barrera
President
Los Angeles Mission College
13356 Eldridge Avenue
Sylmar, CA 91342

Dear President Barrera:

The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, Western Association of Schools and Colleges, at its meeting on June 3-5, 2001, reviewed the institutional self study report and the report of the evaluation team which visited Los Angeles Mission College on March 20-22, 2001. I am pleased to inform you that accreditation has been reaffirmed, with a requirement that the college complete an Interim Report.

The Commission asks that an Interim Report be submitted by November 1, 2002. The Interim Report should focus on the recommendations and concerns found on page 39 of the evaluation team report as noted below:

3. The team recommends that the college complete the development of the Assessment and Planning and Institutional Effectiveness processes and resolve how the old and new planning processes will co-exist during the transitional period. (Standards 3.B.1, 3.B.2, 7.C.1, 7.C.2)

4. The team recommends that the college develop comprehensive plans in the areas of educational and student services programs, facilities, technology and library acquisitions that are linked to resource allocations and tied to the new assessment and planning process. (Standards 3.B.3, 6.5,6.7,8.5)

5. The team recommends that the college expand the research function with adequate staffing and resources to fully support the new planning process. (Standard 3.A.1, 3.A.2, 3.C.3)

6. The team recommends that the college develop an enrollment management plan that provides a framework for strategic growth. (Standard 4.A)

8. The team recommends that additional modifications to the budget allocation model be made that would provide equity to the formula that better meets the needs of the colleges and the district. The formula should be designed to address economies of scale for the small colleges in the district (Standard 9A)

The college is commended for the seriousness with which it undertook its self study and for the quality of its educational and student support programs. The college is also commended for the enthusiasm and vigor with which it has begun to address the communication problems of the past as it looks to the future.

I have previously sent you a copy of the evaluation team report. Additional copies may be duplicated. The Commission requires you to give the report and this letter appropriate dissemination to your college staff and to those who were signatories of your college self study.

The recommendations contained in the evaluation team report represent the observations of the evaluation team at the time of the visit. The Commission reminds you that an institution may concur or disagree with any part of the team report, but we do expect that the report will be used to improve the educational programs and services of the institution.

All colleges are required to file a Midterm Report in the third year after each comprehensive evaluation. Los Angeles Mission College should submit the Midterm Report by November 1, 2003. Midterm Reports indicate progress toward meeting the evaluation team’s recommendations and forecast where the college expects to be by the time of the next comprehensive evaluation. The college also includes a summary of progress on college-identified concerns as expressed in the self study. Information about the Midterm Report is found in the 1997 Guide to Institutional Self Study and Reports to the Commission.

The college conducted a comprehensive self study as part of its evaluation. The Commission suggests that the plans for improvement of the institution included in that document be taken into account in the continuing development of Los Angeles Mission College. The next comprehensive evaluation of the college will occur during academic year 2006-2007.

Finally, let me take this opportunity to remind you that federal legislation affecting accrediting agencies requires that accredited colleges conduct systematic assessment of educational outcomes (see especially Standards Three and Four). A further requirement is that accrediting agencies pay close attention to student loan default rates.

On behalf of the Commission, I wish to express continuing interest in the institution’s educational programs and services. Professional self-regulation is the most effective means of assuring integrity, effectiveness and quality.

Sincerely,

David B. Wolf

tl

cc:
Dr. Mark Drummond, Chancellor
Board President
Dr. Susan Cota, Team Chair
Evaluation Team Members