2026 HLC Visit
April 27 - 28, 2026
Visit Dates: April 27 - 28 , 2026
I. WHAT IS ACCREDITATION
While there are several types of accreditation, the primary accreditation for Phillips Community College of the University of Arkansas is through the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), a regional accrediting agency serving colleges and universities in more than 19 states. Accreditation through HLC ensures that the College meets established standards of quality and effectiveness. This process involves a comprehensive internal review of institutional operations, which is subsequently evaluated by an HLC Peer Review Team comprised of representatives from peer institutions. The review encompasses the College’s mission and all major areas of operation, including academic programs, administration, financial practices, and institutional resources. Areas such as fiscal management, facilities, equipment, and support services are examined, with particular emphasis placed on the ethical, transparent, and effective delivery of educational programs and services.
II. OUR MISSION DRIVES OUR WORK
Our mission is the foundation of all college operations, such as curriculum, teaching and learning, student support and success, ongoing operations, and so much more. The mission guides the college's decision-making, informed by the PCCUA Strategic Plan. It drives employee and student life, community engagement, partnerships, and all aspects of academic and co-curricular pursuits.
Phillips Community College of the University of Arkansas is a two-year college serving the people of Eastern Arkansas. Through robust partnerships, the College is committed to building stronger communities by delivering quality, affordable education for college transfer and work skills training. We provide multiple services and support to ensure student access with success and encourage the pursuit of knowledge and life-long learning, striving to build a foundation for a better life for all.
Phillips Community College of the University of Arkansas is a two-year college serving the people of Eastern Arkansas. Through robust partnerships, the College is committed to building stronger communities by delivering quality, affordable education for college transfer and work skills training. We provide multiple services and support to ensure student access with success and encourage the pursuit of knowledge and life-long learning, striving to build a foundation for a better life for all.
III. TIMELINE
HLC Timeline
| Year | HLC Comprehensive Visit Planning | College Actions Supporting HLC Comprehensive Visit | Significant Infrastructure Changes Impacting Operations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-2022 | Implement actions for Virtual Visit Remind employees of a comprehensive visit Assigned Assessment Report | Revisited and Rewrote the Mission draft | IT Upgrade (Title III) Project One Overview for HR and Business Begin Preparing and Training Virtual Academy Implemented |
| 2022-2023 | Prepare for Assessment reorganization, committee formation, joined Assessment Academy, made assessment the QIP and QIR Appointed HLC Chairs: Quattlebaum and Waites | Faculty meet and revise core values-STACC Skills Strategic Goal Planning for 2025-30 Assessment Academy Revised Vision and values Re-examine and modified General Education Core Competencies | Project One Implementation Training HR & Business New PCCUA Web Page Plan for Athletic Options at PCCUA Revised Catalog and Student Handbook |
| 2023-2024 | Share HLC information Began appointing HLC small work teams Filed HLC Assessment report on Dec. 15, 2023. It was received and approved by HLC | Continued with Assessment work Approved mission, vision, values rewrite-college wide vote at In-service Adopt Strategic Goals for 2025-30 Assessment Academy CCSSE for student input Mainstay Results Matter Student Survey | Project One Full Implementation HR & Business Project One: Work Day Student Planning involving all course prefix and number changes, degree audits, other student and transcript needs BlackBoard Update and Training for all faculty college wide |
| 2024-2025 | Committees meeting Open Review of Assurance Argument Begin HLC Web Page | Formal approval of Mission, vision, values rewrite by all formal decision-making groups. Complete 2025-30 Strategic Plan Assessment Academy College environmental scan -SWOT | Workday Student Full Implementation Reorganization of Governance dividing Student Services into two offices with a Vice Chancellor for each: Admissions and Records and Student Services Examine possible platforms for assessment outcomes, faculty evaluations, and other important assessments-Watermark Piloted Watermark for Student evaluation of faculty Implement basketball on Helena campus Revised Syllabus Template using Simple Syllabus Implementing Introduction of Athletics (basketball, Competitive Cheer, E-sports Ed Sights added to Student Information |
| 2025-2026 | Brief Zoom meetings with employees focusing on the HLC Visit Mock Visit Open Year with HLC Information Finalize Assurance Argument with Evidence Prepare for Lockdown by Feb. 2026 | Fall 2025-Launch Strategic Plan Review HLC Working in preparation for Visit | Workday fully implemented Implement Watermark Training for Watermark Continued Training for Workday ACEN Comprehensive Visit for Nursing Accreditation (Fall 2025) NACEP Reaffirmation Submission (spring 2026) |
| Comprehensive Visit Dates: | April 27 & 28, 2026 |
IV. THE HLC ACCREDITATION PROCESS
There are several elements of the accreditation process, but this brief overview does not include all processes; but provides an outline of what to expect.
- PCCUA is an open pathway college, so we have a four-year mid-cycle stand-alone review and a ten-year comprehensive review, which includes a visit.
- The four-year review requires an Assurance Argument.
- The ten-year comprehensive visit requires we to write an Assurance Argument using evidence to prove we are meeting the HLC criteria, document Federal Compliance, Assumed Practice, and Risk Indicators.
- A Peer Review Team assigned by HLC will read the Assurance Argument and conduct a site visit.
V. THE ASSURANCE ARGUMENT
The HLC Assurance Argument demonstrates the College’s commitment to quality and continuous improvement. It has several components:
- Alignment with the Higher Learning Commission's criteria for accreditation.
- Provides evidence of student learning and institutional effectiveness.
- Emphasizes the College’s mission, vision, values, goals, and strategic planning.
- Serves as the College’s primary accreditation review assessing compliance and performance.
- Is updated regularly to document ongoing improvements and changes.
VI. FEDERAL COMPLIANCE
As part of the Comprehensive evaluation, HLC will review PCCUA’s compliance with federal regulations and HLC's assumed practices. The practices listed are abbreviated from the HLC Federal Compliance Web page. https://www.hlcommission.org/accreditation/cycles-and-processes/comprehensive-evaluation/federal-compliance/
1. Program Length and Tuition
HLC’s intent is to:
2. Institutional Records Regarding Student Complaints
PCCUA must demonstrate that it utilizes a systematic complaint-tracking process that best fits its needs. This process should contemplate any formal complaint the institution receives, regardless of the subject matter. Whatever approach the institution takes, the institution should demonstrate that its tracking process effectively allows student complaints to be received, tracked, and handled in a timely manner.
HLC’s intent is to:
- Review an institution’s policies regarding the award of credit in relation to the types of courses, disciplines, programs, credential levels and formats offered, regardless of modality;
- Determine how the institution ensures it is adhering to those policies; and
- Review the institution’s process for verifying length of academic period and compliance with credit hour requirements through course scheduling.
PCCUA must demonstrate that it utilizes a systematic complaint-tracking process that best fits its needs. This process should contemplate any formal complaint the institution receives, regardless of the subject matter. Whatever approach the institution takes, the institution should demonstrate that its tracking process effectively allows student complaints to be received, tracked, and handled in a timely manner.
3. Publication of Transfer Policies
The institution must disclose its transfer policies to students and to the public. At a minimum, these disclosures must include:
4. Practices for Verification of Student Identity
Explanation of This Requirement
An institution must verify the identity of students who participate in courses or programs provided through distance education or correspondence education.
The institution must also demonstrate that it is making reasonable efforts to protect student privacy in verifying student identity.
The institution must disclose its transfer policies to students and to the public. At a minimum, these disclosures must include:
- Any established criteria the institution uses regarding the transfer of credit earned at another institution, and any types of institutions or sources from which the institution will not accept credits.
- A list of institutions with which the institution.
- Offers courses for which credits are accepted by the other institution(s) through the articulation agreement.
- Both offer courses and accept credits with the other institution(s) in the articulation agreement.
4. Practices for Verification of Student Identity
Explanation of This Requirement
An institution must verify the identity of students who participate in courses or programs provided through distance education or correspondence education.
The institution must also demonstrate that it is making reasonable efforts to protect student privacy in verifying student identity.
5. Protection of Student Privacy
An institution must develop and maintain procedures to ensure student privacy is protected in compliance with relevant federal law. An institution must also ensure the privacy and security of student data (including without limitation, student records). In addition, an institution must provide training to ensure adherence to established procedures by employees (and any third-party contractors acting on the institution’s behalf). The institution must also be transparent with students about how any personal data is collected and used.
34 CFR §602.17(h)
6. Publication of Student Achievement Data
An institution is required to publicly disclose student achievement data.
Content: The student achievement data must include, at a minimum, retention, completion, licensure exam pass rates (as applicable), and data about students after graduation (such as graduate school, employment, etc.). It may also include other student success outcomes appropriate for the mission of the institution and its goals for all students.
Data may be provided at the institutional or departmental level or both, but the institution must disclose data that address the broad variety of its programs, including at the undergraduate and graduate levels as applicable. The institution may utilize data provided by the U.S. Department of Education or other external source.
Format: The institution should disclose the student achievement data on a public page on the institution’s website.
If student achievement data is displayed in multiple places on the institution’s website, the institution should have a summary webpage that links to all of the published student achievement data.
An institution must develop and maintain procedures to ensure student privacy is protected in compliance with relevant federal law. An institution must also ensure the privacy and security of student data (including without limitation, student records). In addition, an institution must provide training to ensure adherence to established procedures by employees (and any third-party contractors acting on the institution’s behalf). The institution must also be transparent with students about how any personal data is collected and used.
34 CFR §602.17(h)
6. Publication of Student Achievement Data
An institution is required to publicly disclose student achievement data.
Content: The student achievement data must include, at a minimum, retention, completion, licensure exam pass rates (as applicable), and data about students after graduation (such as graduate school, employment, etc.). It may also include other student success outcomes appropriate for the mission of the institution and its goals for all students.
Data may be provided at the institutional or departmental level or both, but the institution must disclose data that address the broad variety of its programs, including at the undergraduate and graduate levels as applicable. The institution may utilize data provided by the U.S. Department of Education or other external source.
Format: The institution should disclose the student achievement data on a public page on the institution’s website.
If student achievement data is displayed in multiple places on the institution’s website, the institution should have a summary webpage that links to all of the published student achievement data.
7. Standing With State and Other Accreditors
An institution must fairly represent to HLC and to the public its history and status with other recognized accreditors and with each state in which it is authorized or licensed. This includes accurately disclosing when an action affects its accreditation status or authorization has been taken by another recognized accreditor or state entity.
An institution must affirmatively disclose to HLC any pending or final state actions that affect the institution’s legal status or authority to grant degrees or offer educational programs. An institution must also disclose to HLC any pending or final actions by a recognized accreditor to withdraw accredited or pre-accredited status or to impose a sanction, Show-Cause Order or adverse action.
8. Recruiting, Admissions and Related Enrollment Practices
Among other requirements, an institution must have a code of conduct (or the equivalent) related to recruiting, admissions, and financial aid, as well as training materials for any recruiters, admissions counselors, marketing or advertising staff, financial aid advisors, and any other personnel engaged in direct communications with prospective and current students. Institutions are also responsible for exercising appropriate oversight over any third-party contractor(s) involved in providing such services to prospective and current students.
Additional Documents
If applicable, the institution should provide any correspondence from the U.S. Department of Education that articulate a rationale for any negative actions and any reports issued by the institution demonstrating the institution’s improvement efforts in response to such communications. Negative actions include, but are not limited to, limitation, suspension or termination actions by the Department; letter of credit requirements, fines, heightened cash monitoring, or reimbursement payment methods imposed by the Department; or other negative findings on the basis of any Single Audit (or its equivalent) submitted by the institution. This documentation should be included in the institution’s Federal Compliance Filing as Appendix A.
An institution must fairly represent to HLC and to the public its history and status with other recognized accreditors and with each state in which it is authorized or licensed. This includes accurately disclosing when an action affects its accreditation status or authorization has been taken by another recognized accreditor or state entity.
An institution must affirmatively disclose to HLC any pending or final state actions that affect the institution’s legal status or authority to grant degrees or offer educational programs. An institution must also disclose to HLC any pending or final actions by a recognized accreditor to withdraw accredited or pre-accredited status or to impose a sanction, Show-Cause Order or adverse action.
8. Recruiting, Admissions and Related Enrollment Practices
Among other requirements, an institution must have a code of conduct (or the equivalent) related to recruiting, admissions, and financial aid, as well as training materials for any recruiters, admissions counselors, marketing or advertising staff, financial aid advisors, and any other personnel engaged in direct communications with prospective and current students. Institutions are also responsible for exercising appropriate oversight over any third-party contractor(s) involved in providing such services to prospective and current students.
Additional Documents
If applicable, the institution should provide any correspondence from the U.S. Department of Education that articulate a rationale for any negative actions and any reports issued by the institution demonstrating the institution’s improvement efforts in response to such communications. Negative actions include, but are not limited to, limitation, suspension or termination actions by the Department; letter of credit requirements, fines, heightened cash monitoring, or reimbursement payment methods imposed by the Department; or other negative findings on the basis of any Single Audit (or its equivalent) submitted by the institution. This documentation should be included in the institution’s Federal Compliance Filing as Appendix A.
Fraud, Abuse or Failing to Meet Title IV Responsibilities
Institutions should be aware that the Federal Compliance peer review report includes a requirement that the team bring to HLC’s attention any circumstances encountered during the review that give them reason to believe that the institution (1) is not fulfilling its Title IV, HEA responsibilities or (2) is engaged in fraud or abuse.
Institutions should be aware that the Federal Compliance peer review report includes a requirement that the team bring to HLC’s attention any circumstances encountered during the review that give them reason to believe that the institution (1) is not fulfilling its Title IV, HEA responsibilities or (2) is engaged in fraud or abuse.
VII. HLC ASSUMED PRACTICES
A. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
B. Teaching and Learning: Quality Resources and Support
C. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
D. Resources Planning and Institutional Effectiveness
For details about HLC Assumed Practices visit the following link.
VIII. PREPARING FOR THE HLC VISIT
A Peer Review Team will be assigned to visit the PCCUA campuses for 1 ½ days. However, the Team will stay longer working away from campus and preparing their report. Usually, the Team arrives Sunday afternoon or evening and works until Wednesday at noon.
For more information about the Comprehensive visit, see the following HLC Link.
- Visits are designed to review information that may not be in the Assurance Argument. It is also a time for the peer reviewers to validate information in the Assurance Argument.
- The Team will establish a schedule working with the HLC Liaison, and it will include meetings with the Chancellor, BOT & BOV representatives, faculty, staff, students, and others. They usually want to meet with those who contributed to the Argument, for example, several faculty contributed lessons, and staff have shared processes such as how we process financial aid.
- The Team sometimes has an area of focus that they need for clarification of policies, practices, and protocols, which might require a separate meeting.
- There will be an open forum on the Criteria.
- In some cases, the meetings may be composed of people doing the same kind of work, such as faculty, staff or students, but it is acceptable to have mixed groups, and that could be how the meetings are designed for the PCCUA visit. It really depends on the Peer Review Team.
- Most of the HLC Visit will be in Helena; however, at least one Team member will visit the other two campuses. Dr. Kim Kirby is the ambassador for that. At the campus meetings, the reviewer will meet with a group or possibly more than one group.
- Once the schedule for the meetings has been established, it will be posted on the HLC Web page.
For more information about the Comprehensive visit, see the following HLC Link.
IX. QUESTIONS YOU MAY BE ASKED DURING THE VISIT
The Peer Review Team will ask questions of a wide range of people employed are enrolled at the College. They will also want to hear from the BOV and BOT. The list of questions is not what a reviewer might ask, but the questions are related to areas that relate to the kind of questions a reviewer might ask. Reviewing how you might respond is helpful and helps you sort out areas you may want to share or discuss with the group.
BOARD OF VISITORS & BOARD OF TRUSTEES
STUDENTS
FACULTY
STAFF
BOARD OF VISITORS & BOARD OF TRUSTEES
- What is your role at the College?
- Do new members receive an orientation?
- Is the Board helpful in helping PCCUA complete its mission? How?
- Do you receive financial updates? If so, do you perceive any resource concerns in the future?
- What is the biggest concern facing the College?
- Do you receive academic and enrollment updates? Are there any areas of concern?
- What do you think is the College’s strongest asset?
- Does the Board discuss and examine governance roles?
- Do you feel you understand your role as a BOV or BOT?
- Explain the distinction between the BOV and the BOT.
- Why did you choose to come to PCCUA?
- What are some good things about your education at PCCUA?
- Would you recommend this college to another person?
- Have you had any difficulties here?
- What has been your experience with advising?
- Were you supported in your efforts to get financial aid?
- Do you know where to find help for the following areas: academic support, support services, IT support, counseling, and other areas such as Career Pathways, Student Support Services, and the Virtual Academy?
- Do you understand your tuition and fee bill?
- Do you feel as though you can talk to your advisor?
- Can you talk to your instructors?
- Have you participated in any community service activities?
- Did you receive information about financial aid, student conduct, tuition, and fees?
- Where were you likely to find the information you need about the College?
- Was your degree plan easy to follow?
- Did you participate in any extracurricular activities? If so, how did you find the experience?
- What kind of real work experience have you had, and what kind of experience was it?
- How does the mission relate to you and what you teach?
- How does the values statement reflect the distinct needs of students at PCCUA? Explain.
- How do faculty engage in college governance processes? What roles do faculty play in the academic decision-making?
- Do departments collaborate with each other? Give me some examples?
- In terms of faculty workload, compensation, and development, what works well at PCC and what needs to be changed?
- What kind of student support is provided outside the classroom? Inside the classroom?
- How do you know students are learning?
- How has assessment informed your teaching practices?
- Do you think all classes of the same subject area are using the same SLOs and assessment?
- Do you think that face-to-face, online, blended, dual credit students enrolled in a common course use the same SLos and assessments? Explain.
- Are your resource needs met by the College?
- Give me some examples of how freedom of speech is protected in the classroom.
- Provide some examples of how you use creative inquiry in teaching.
- How do you teach inquiry, research techniques, and the appropriate use of resources and AI? Give me some examples?
- Do you believe the college is transparent in its course and program requirements and regulations?
- What kind of community engagement do students have?
- What are some key factors that contribute to retention and completion?
- How have these impacted student success?
- What happens to students once they graduate?
- What role do you play as an instructor once they have left the College?
- What do you do in your teaching to contribute to student success?
- How does the mission guide the work I do and the department where I work?
- How does my department interact with other departments? Explain.
- Am I provided with professional development opportunities?
- What are the College benefits? Is the treatment of staff the same as others in terms of these benefits?
- Give me some examples of interdepartmental collaboration. Do you think this works well? If not, what needs to be changed?
- Do you have resource issues related to completing work in your job role?
- How do you interact with students? Do you understand the enrollment process and the work groups do from one department to another?
- What do you like best about your job?
- Do you have an opportunity to be involved in campus decision-making?
- Did you engage in planning and work rewriting the mission and vision statements?
- If you could improve one thing in your job or at the College, what would it be?
GENERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VISIT AND THE COLLEGE
- Have you seen or read the Assurance Argument?
- Have you had an opportunity to prepare for the Peer Evaluation?
- Did you have an opportunity to engage in planning the mission, vision, values, and strategic plan?
- How did you engage in that process?
- What do you think are the college's strengths, weaknesses, challenges, and threats?
- Do you think the college is committed to freedom of expression? Does the College protect your rights to privacy?
- What kind of changes do you see taking place at the College?
- What is the general campus climate, morale, and feeling about the College?
X. HLC RESOURCES
HLC Federal Compliance https://www.hlcommission.org/accreditation/policies/federal-compliance-requirements/
HLC Comprehensive Evaluations https://www.hlcommission.org/accreditation/cycles-and-processes/comprehensive-evaluation/
The Comprehensive Evaluation https://www.hlcommission.org/accreditation/cycles-and-processes/comprehensive-evaluation/comprehensive-evaluation-visit/
XI. HLC PLANNING MEETINGS
XII. ASSURANCE ARGUMENT COMMITTEES
Steering Committee
Criterion 2
Criterion 4
Doug Bielemeier
Carol Birth
Jessica Hindsley
Kayla Holland
Kim Kirby
Dr. Keith Pinchback
Julie Pittman
Shanna Pryor
Monica Quattlebaum
Michelle Waites
Criterion 1
Stephanie Arnold
Von Daniels
Arthur Gentry
Deborah Gentry
Kena Henderson
Amy Hudman
Kimberly Johnson
Kim Rawls
Kelly Roberts
Renee Robinson
Joe St. Columbia
Michelle Waites
Wandra Williams
Liz Byrd/Raymond Willie
Others
Andrew Bagley
Kim Banks
Doug Bielemeier
Carol Birth
Von Daniels
Kena Henderson
Jessica Hindsley
Kayla Holland
Kimberly Johnson
Kim Kirby
Julie Pittman
Shanna Pryor
Yvette Robertson
Kelly Roberts
Keri Simpson
Rhonda St. Columbia
Michelle Waites
Lee Williams
Others
Criterion 3
Andrew Bagley
Joe Berry
Joe Berry III
Carol Birth
Valerie Bloesch
Von Daniels
Cathy Fullilove
Tomisha Gant
Scott Gunem
Amy Hudman
Rosary Jones
Charlotte Purdy
Monica Quattlebaum
Kim Rawls
Tarsha Smith
Joe St. Columbia
Others
Doug Bielemeier
Carol Birth
David Dunigan
Stephanie Dunigan
Heather Funk
Kena Henderson
Kayla Holland
Demetric Johnson
Gretchen Jones
Kim Kirby
Shanna Pryor
Monica Quattlebaum
Keri Simpson
Stan Sullivant
Joe St. Columbia
Rhonda St. Columbia
Stephanie Terry
Others
Note: The Criterion meetings are open to anyone who has an interest. People listed are invited because they have some expertise in the Criterion or have provided evidence in support of the argument related to that criterion.
XIII. ASSURANCE ARGUMENT MEETINGS
| Date | CRITERION ONE AND EVIDENCE | CRITERION TWO AND EVIDENCE | CRITERION THREE AND EVIDENCE | CRITERION FOUR AND EVIDENCE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9/4/2025 | College Read | |||
| 9/11/2025 | College Read | |||
| 11/12/2025 | College Read | |||
| 11/17/2025 | College Read | |||
| 12/9/2025 | College Read | |||
| 12/10/2025 | College Read | |||
| 12/11/2025 | Close Read | |||
| 12/12/2025 | Close Read | |||
| 12/15/2025 | College Read | |||
| 12/16/2025 | College Read | |||
| 12/18/2025 | Close Read | |||
| 12/19/2025 | Close Read |
Expand
Close All