| The final draft report of the site visit team is the responsibility of the team Chair. Drafts of report sections previously assigned to individual members of the team are submitted to the Chair prior to leaving the site.
Following a general introduction, each section of the report will coincide with a standard requirement, and a list of recommendations. The report indicates in what ways the college complies, substantially complies, or does not comply with the standard requirements. Strengths as well as weaknesses are noted. Recommendations are written with enough detail to be helpful to team members on subsequent site visits as well as to the current college administration, but are not intended to be prescriptive.
The Chair of the site visit team will provide AVMA staff with an edited draft copy of the report within ten days following the visit for duplication and distribution to the team members. Each member will review the draft, suggest changes, and make corrections. Such suggested changes and corrections will be sent to the Chair of the site visit team within ten days of receipt of the draft by each member of the team. The Chair of the team will prepare a final draft of the report and forward it to staff within thirty days of the conclusion of the visit. Copies of the final draft are sent by AVMA staff to the dean of the college for correction of factual errors. The final draft, together with any comments by the dean or the university president, is presented to the Council by the Chair of the site visit team at the next semi-annual Council meeting. Materials received after the report of evaluation draft has been finalized will not be considered before an accreditation decision is made.
Recommendations are a part of the Report of Evaluation. Recommendations may be suggestions for program improvement or citations for Standards violations. Standards violations that result in lowered accreditation status are clearly noted by the following statement: *COE Evaluation of the self-study, the site visit report and all other documentation, confirms that the program does not comply (meet) with the Standard. Another notation is used to identify substantial compliance with a Standard and is designated by the following statement: **COE Evaluation of the self-study, the site visit report, and all other documentation, confirms that the program is in substantial compliance, but not full compliance with the Standard.
Within 90 days of mailing the final Report of Evaluation, the COE will request that the dean of the school/college provide written comments on outcome(s) of the accreditation process. Specifically, he/she will provide comments regarding the impact of the recommendations on 1) the education and educational process of the DVM/VMD students, 2) student outcomes, 3) program finances, 4) the university, 5) the state legislative process (where appropriate), and 6) other (to be defined by the dean). This report will be used by the Council to determine if the recommendations are clearly understood; and to determine the impact of the recommendations on the school/college/university/state.
|
= AVMA/SAVMA Members Only
