Estado de Acreditación del MSCHE

STATEMENT OF ACCREDITATION STATUS

UPR – RIO PIEDRAS CAMPUS
P. O. Box 23300
San Juan, PR 00931-3300
Phone: (787) 764-0000; Fax: (787) 764-8799
www.uprrp.edu

auto-estudio

Chief Executive Officer: Dr. Carlos E. Severino Valdez, Chancellor
System: University of Puerto Rico Central Administration
Dr. Uroyoan Walker, President
G.P.O. Box 4984-G
San Juan, PR 00936
Phone: (787) 759-6061; Fax: (787) 759-6917
INSTITUTIONAL INFORMATION
Enrollment (Headcount): 13854 Undergraduate; 4783 Graduate
Control: Public
Affiliation: Government-State and Local- See notes at the end of the section.
Carnegie Classification: Research – High Research Activity
Approved Degree Levels: Bachelor’s, Postbaccalaureate Award/Cert/Diploma, Master’s, Post-Master’s Award/Cert/Diploma, Doctor’s – Professional Practice, Doctor’s – Research/Scholarship;
Distance Education Programs: Approved (School Library Certificate Program)
Accreditors Recognized by U.S. Secretary of Education: Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Accreditation Council for Education in Nutrition and Dietetics ; American Bar Association, Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar ; National Association of Schools of Art and Design, Commission on Accreditation; National Association of Schools of Music, Commission on Accreditation,; National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education
Other Accreditors: Accredited: AACSB;AAHPERD;AALS;ABA;ABET;ACBSP;ACEI;ACEJMC;ACEND;ACS;ALA;CAEP/NCATE;CEC;CORE;CSWE;NAAB;NAEYC;NAPSE;NASPAA;NCSS;NCTM;NSTA;PAB;TESOL Candidate for Accreditation: APA;NASAD;NASM;NAST
Instructional Locations
Branch Campuses: None
Additional Locations: Abbott Laboratories, Barceloneta, PR; Pfizer Pharmaceutical Company, Barceloneta, PR; UPR Humacao, Humacao, PR
Other Instructional Sites: None
ACCREDITATION INFORMATION
Status: Member since 1946
Last Reaffirmed: November 17, 2011

Most Recent Commission Action:

June 26, 2014: To accept the monitoring report. To remind the institution of its obligation to ensure timely production of audited financial statements. The next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2015-2016.

Brief History Since Last Comprehensive Evaluation:

November 17, 2011: To accept the monitoring report, to note the visit by the Commission’s representatives, to remove probation, and to reaffirm accreditation. To remind the institution that a monitoring report is due April 1, 2012 on Standard 2 (Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal), Standard 3 (Institutional Resources), Standard 7 (Institutional Assessment), Standard 12 (General Education), and Standard 14 (Assessment of Student Learning). The monitoring report should document further progress in (1) strengthening institutional resources and developing alternative forms of income, including institutional pro-forma budgets that demonstrate the institution’s ability to generate a balanced budget for fiscal years 2012 through 2014, including the personnel, compensation, and other assumptions on which these budgets are based (Standard 3); (2) steps taken to ensure timely production of audited financial statements for FY 2011 and subsequent years (Standard 3); (3) further steps taken to improve communication and shared governance, especially in documenting how campus input is solicited and considered in decision-making at the System level (Standard 4); (4) evidence of further implementation of the UPR Action Plan, including evidence that the action plan is being assessed and data are used for improvements (Standard 7); (5) evidence that steps have been taken to assure continuity and stability of institutional leadership, particularly in times of governmental transitions (Standard 5); (6) evidence that communication between the Central Administration and the institution, is clear, timely, accurate, and made available to all constituents; and (7) evidence of further progress in implementing a procedure for the periodic objective assessment of the Board of Trustees (Standard 4). To further request that the monitoring report document evidence (1) that the institution continues to improve communication, especially with respect to soliciting and considering campus input in decision-making (Standard 2); (2) that the administration makes every effort to expedite the work of the search committees that have been constituted to fill the deanships (Standard 5); and (3) that the institution creates additional opportunities, both formal and informal, to directly receive input from students (Standard 6). A visit may follow submission of the monitoring report. The next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2015-2016.
June 28, 2012: To accept the monitoring report. The next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2015-2016.
June 13, 2013: To request, in accordance with the Commission’s policy on Public Communication in the Accrediting Process, a supplemental information report, due July 10, 2013, that addresses the impact on institutional leadership of the recent changes in governance and administration, the investigation by the National Science Foundation’s Office of the Inspector General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and actions planned or taken by the University to ensure ongoing compliance with Standards 4, 5 and 6. The next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2015-2016.
June 25, 2013: To note that an extension has been granted for the submission of a supplemental information report that addresses the impact on institutional leadership of the recent changes in governance and administration, the investigation by the National Science Foundation’s Office of the Inspector General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and actions planned or taken by the University to ensure ongoing compliance with Standards 4, 5 and 6. The supplemental information report is now due August 1, 2013. The next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2015-2016.
November 21, 2013: To accept the supplemental information report. To request a monitoring report, due April 1, 2014, documenting evidence of an independent audit for FY2013, with evidence of follow-up on any concerns cited in the audit’s accompanying management letter for both FY2012 and FY2013 (Standard 3). To remind the institution of its obligation to inform the Commission about any and all significant developments related to the investigation of the National Science Foundation. The Commission expects to be informed of such developments within ten business days of their occurrence. To further remind the institution of its obligation to ensure timely production of audited financial statements. The next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2015-2016.

Next Self-Study Evaluation: 2015 – 2016

Next Periodic Review Report: 2021

Date Printed: January 18, 2016

DEFINITIONS

Branch Campus – A location of an institution that is geographically apart and independent of the main campus of the institution. The location is independent if the location: 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.

Additional Location – A location, other than a branch campus, that is geographically apart from the main campus and at which the institution offers at least 50 percent of an educational program. 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.

Other Instructional Sites – A location, other than a branch campus or additional location, at which the institution offers one or more courses for credit.

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.