For both initial accreditation and renewal of accreditation, the process starts when the chief executive officer of the university seeking accreditation sends a letter of invitation to the ACEJMC executive director. Units located outside the 50 U.S. states also must submit a Notice of Accreditation Review form at this time. This form, provided by ACEJMC to the unit seeking accreditation, must be completed and returned to the executive director. After the initial site visit, subsequent visits are made at six-year intervals upon invitation.
The Council works on a multi-year cycle for scheduling visits. A new school must inform the ACEJMC executive director at least three years before it expects a visit in order to be placed on the schedule and to allow time for a pre-visit.
An institution that has invited ACEJMC to examine its program and render an accreditation judgment may withdraw its invitation at any time before the Accrediting Council makes its final decision on the accreditation status of the unit. ACEJMC may terminate the accreditation/reaccreditation review process for a unit if, after due notice, the institution fails to initiate the required accreditation invitation or is otherwise uncooperative with ACEJMC in scheduling the site review. When the time for accreditation renewal nears, the ACEJMC executive director reminds the institution.
The ACEJMC executive director has the authority to grant postponements for one year. The full Council considers requests for a second year’s postponement. If the executive director denies a postponement request, the school has fifteen (15) days after receipt of notification of the denial to appeal the decision to the Council’s Executive Committee. If a postponement is approved, an asterisk will be placed beside the school’s listing in this publication and on ACEJMC’s website indicating that the school has delayed its accreditation visit.
The deadline for requesting a postponement, for both new units seeking accreditation and for units seeking reaccreditation, is generally July 1 two years before the scheduled site visit. For example, the deadline for requesting a postponement for a unit on the 2027-2028 site-visit schedule would be July 1, 2026. The deadline for requesting a postponement for a unit on the 2028-2029 site-visit schedule would be July 1, 2027. Schools seeking a postponement are expected to meet the deadline unless the reason(s) for requesting the postponement are both late-breaking and unforeseen (e.g., natural disaster, pandemic, civil/political unrest, etc.).
ACEJMC does not routinely postpone accrediting visits. Postponements are only granted under extraordinary circumstances. ACEJMC will not grant postponements for purposes of convenience or scheduling, or for matters pertaining to new facilities, internal review, or administrative changes.
The heart of the accrediting process is the self-study, a systematic examination by the unit of the environment in which it operates, its mission, range of activities, accomplishments, and plans for the future. The twin objectives of the accrediting process — quality assessment and quality enhancement — depend on a thorough self-study. The contents of the self-study should reflect input from faculty and administrators and should only be submitted if there is general agreement that it is an accurate assessment of the unit.
The self-study should concentrate on the extent to which a unit achieves its goals. Thus, the self-study’s findings and judgments about the quality of the curriculum, learning outcomes, faculty, equipment, facilities, budgets and the like should be evaluated in the context of how well a unit is serving its stated purpose. The self-study will contain the unit’s mission statement to aid the site team, Accrediting Committee and Council in evaluating the extent to which a unit is meeting its goals.
The periodic self-study is also a mechanism for change. It permits a unit to address the need to change its mission or its programs and activities. For example, a self-study conducted in advance of a site visit might identify a need to change a specific set of learning objectives. During the site visit, if the unit can demonstrate that it has made measurable progress in implementing this change and can provide evidence that institutional administrators support the change, and if the unit has a history of achieving its goals in the past, the site team should take this as evidence that the self-study is, in fact, functioning as a mechanism for change and is ultimately working to enhance and improve the quality of the program under review.
While assessing whether a unit is meeting objective industry and academic standards should naturally fall within the scope of any comprehensive self-examination, the self-study serves a broader purpose that extends beyond mere compliance assessment.
The self-study is not done for ACEJMC alone. It should not be looked upon as merely a compliance exercise. An effective self-study depends upon internal motivation. The unit participates voluntarily in the accrediting process as a means of quality assessment as well as quality enhancement. While the self-study must include an evaluation of the unit’s performance against ACEJMC’s published standards, it should also aid in effecting positive change by identifying opportunities for enhancement, growth and improvement.
The self-study shall be conducted during the academic year before the site team’s visit. The self-study generally is conducted every six years.
The design of the self-study will be unique to the unit, depending on its size, the range of its responsibilities, and the specific purposes of the self-study beyond an assessment of the extent to which the unit complies with the accrediting standards.
A self-study has two general objectives. First is the assessment of the extent to which the unit is accomplishing its goals, including its compliance with accrediting standards, and its capacity to do so in the future. Second is the development of a plan of action. Two questions to help measure the success of the self-study process are: Did the self-study effect change? If so, did the changes make things better?
The size and complexity of the unit will affect the structure of the self-study. It is often useful to designate a coordinator to lead the work. The coordinator may work through a steering committee, which will be particularly active in the planning and design phase and in the development of the final report and recommendations. This committee may delegate to others both inside and outside the unit the responsibility for collecting data and evaluating parts of the program.
Additionally, during the planning and design phase, the unit reviews existing planning documents, previous accrediting reports, and the current ACEJMC standards. It also develops a list of key questions to be addressed in the self-study.
At this stage, the unit may set a tentative timetable, draft a preliminary outline for the report, identify the methods that it will use to evaluate its program(s) and activities, develop a master list of data needed for the study, decide how recommendations and action items will be developed, and assign someone to write the report.
The study usually includes an examination of the environment in which the unit functions (within the institution as well as outside), an assessment of the number and quality of students served, the values of the faculty and the institution, the competitive advantages that the unit enjoys, and the strengths and weaknesses of the unit.
These assessments may be followed by an examination and revision of the mission of the unit and the identification of goals, programs and activities to accomplish the mission. A next step would be the assessment of the extent to which the unit is able to accomplish its goals. Finally, the unit develops plans to enhance its chances of success and identifies a mechanism to evaluate those plans.
Having developed a mission statement, a unit might go on to examine its goals and decide whether they are clear and appropriate to the mission. Next, a unit will consider whether the programs and activities it has undertaken to accomplish those goals are consistent with the goals, whether they are working, what problems exist, possible solutions, and the adequacy of resources to meet the goals.
Finally, a unit should explore the extent of its compliance with accreditation standards and how to bring itself into fuller compliance.
The ACEJMC executive director sends each unit that has requested a site review the digital templates to use in the preparation of the text and tables contained in the self-study report. These template files provide a coherent structure for gathering and presenting the quantitative and qualitative information that establishes the foundation of an effective self-study document. The templates are sent in September of the academic year before the site visit occurs.
The self-study report contains two parts. Part I is a set of responses to general questions about the unit. Part II provides more detailed information about compliance with the accreditation standards and supporting documentation.
Part I is essentially an introduction to the report. It covers such basics as size of enrollment in each academic specialty, the unit’s mission, faculty makeup, and accreditation history. The information in Part I is included in the site team’s report to the Committee and Council.
Part II of the report comprises two main sections. The first section provides supplementary information about the unit’s mission and scope. This section includes summaries of the unit’s history and traditions, its purpose and activities, and its goals and plans for the future.
The second main section under Part II comprises a series of subsections in which the unit documents its compliance with each one of ACEJMC’s accreditation standards. These subsections contain text and tables that provide detailed information related to each standard.
The best self-studies are well written and concise and focus on key issues. They also should include input from a unit’s faculty and administration. They present a candid and balanced view of the unit’s strengths and weaknesses, and they provide a systematic analysis of the unit’s compliance with the accreditation standards.
Compiling information for the self-study is not intended to burden a unit unduly. Whenever possible, the unit should present information and data in forms readily available.
The unit first submits its self-study report in digital format to the ACEJMC office for preliminary review. The due date is established when the site visit date is scheduled. The ACEJMC executive director will examine the report to determine whether it provides a satisfactory foundation for the site visit.
The executive director first reviews the self-study for completeness. Suggestions, if any, are then sent only to the unit head. The unit head determines whether any further revisions are needed and sends the self-study on to the site team chair.
Occasionally, the ACEJMC executive director’s examination will identify significant inadequacies. The executive director has the authority to postpone or cancel an accreditation visit if the self-study is not of sufficient quality for the site team to evaluate a unit.
In other cases, the executive director may ask that additional information be supplied to the site team. The executive director also may cancel an accrediting visit if the unit misses its self-study submission deadline.
It is the responsibility of the unit to inform the Council of any significant changes to the unit that occur between submission of the self-study and the site visit, or between the site visit and the spring Committee and Council meetings.
If a unit wishes to be exempt from all or part of a specific indicator, it must provide reasons and evidence for the exemption in its self-study. When the unit submits its self-study for review, it must specifically request exemption and identify the standard(s) and page(s) where it makes its case.
When the unit submits its self-study to each team member, it must repeat this request. The site team has both the authority and duty to grant or deny the request and must justify its decision in its site visit report.
The principal responsibility of the site-visit team is quality assessment. The team must prepare its own report regarding the extent to which, in its judgment, the unit meets the standards of good practice expressed in the general principles and the accrediting standards of ACEJMC. The team must recommend to the Accrediting Committee and to the Accrediting Council the approval, denial, continuation, or change in the accreditation status of a unit.
From its examination of the self-study report before the visit, the team will develop questions about the unit to explore during the visit. The self-study report provides the basis of the team’s initial understanding of the unit, its mission, the range of its programs and activities, its evaluation of itself and its plans for the future. Thus, a report that merely describes the unit is not a satisfactory base on which to build a useful site visit.
A self-study report developed from careful analysis of the unit’s programs and activities will eliminate tension that sometimes develops between the site team and unit personnel concerning what a team might “find” during the visit. A good self-study should eliminate surprises. It also indicates the unit is well managed, establishes priorities accurately, and uses resources effectively.
Beyond its primary functions of quality assessment and the development of a recommendation about the accreditation status of the unit, a site-visit team may be useful to the unit in other ways. The self-study might identify questions that unit personnel may wish to ask the experts on the team during the site visit. In that way, the role of the site team members may be expanded to include advisement in addition to quality assessment. Unit heads should discuss requests for such assistance with the ACEJMC executive director and the site team chair in advance of the site visit.
Some units couple an accreditation review with an internal program review. ACEJMC recommends holding the accreditation review first and then using the site team’s findings to help plan an additional internal review.
Some units also couple their ACEJMC review with a PRSA Certification for Education in Public Relations review.
Site-visit teams are chosen by the ACEJMC executive director in consultation with administrative staff and ACEJMC officers. The institution seeking accreditation has the right to review the composition and curricula vitae of the site-team members. It has the right to ask that team members who may have a conflict of interest be replaced, and it has the right to expect a majority of members will be from peer institutions and industry groups and organizations with interests in programs that the institution offers.
Persons invited to serve as members of site teams are expected to disqualify themselves if they are aware of any situation or circumstance that might be a conflict of interest (or be construed as a conflict of interest) and, thus, call into question the independence of their judgments and decisions. See Pages 19-20 for complete information on the Council’s conflict-of-interest policy.
ACEJMC maintains a pool of potential team members, including female and racial/ethnic minority practitioners and educators. The Council strongly encourages that every effort be made to include on each site-visit team at least one industry representative or educator who is a member of an ethnic/racial minority group and at least one female practitioner or educator. The site-visit team also should include at least one person who is not a member of the Accrediting Committee or the Accrediting Council.
During the site visit, the team will try to learn firsthand all that it can about the unit, its specialties and its place within the institution. Site teams examine every aspect of the unit and institution that might affect the quality of the program. Team members assess quality through interviews with faculty, administrators, students and representatives of other schools; class visits; examination of student records, alumni records and communications; examination of equipment and buildings; and analysis of budgets.
Visits are staggered over a period starting in early fall and ending in February. Precise visit dates are determined by the ACEJMC executive director and the unit administrators. The administrator of the unit being visited is responsible for arranging hotel accommodations for the site-visit team.
Visits normally start on Sunday night and run through Wednesday morning, but the days and length of the visits can vary depending on the size and complexity of a unit’s program and other circumstances. The unit administrator is asked to prepare a detailed schedule for the accreditation visit and consult with the team chair on planning the schedule. A sample site-visit schedule is typically provided by the ACEJMC executive director.
The unit’s administrator has dinner with the team on the first night. It is inappropriate for sequence heads and other faculty members to attend the first night’s dinner. It is permissible for the school’s dean, associate dean or director to attend. The administrator can clarify points in the self-study, answer questions about the visit and schedule, and provide updated or supplementary information. The site-team chair may wish to arrange for a tour of the building the first night.
On the first full day of the visit, the unit hosts a breakfast for the site team with faculty and a lunch with some of its advisory board members, alumni and other university faculty. Although this is not absolutely necessary, it does provide an opportunity to become acquainted. With these exceptions, site team members may not accept invitations to social affairs such as receptions, cocktail parties or meals.
During the visit, team members attend classes and interview faculty members. The team conducts two 45-minute group interviews with students on separate days of the visit. Each interview should be with 20 or more students, if possible. If the unit offers more than one sequence, the unit administrator should arrange for meetings on the second day of the visit with students in each sequence. The team also meets with the dean or provost to whom the unit administrator reports.
In the morning on the last day of the visit, the site team meets with the chief executive officer of the institution to present the site team report.
Unit heads are expected to provide site team members with a dedicated workroom equipped with desks or tables, computers, internet access, a printer, water, and light snacks, if possible. The team should also have easy access to a copier. Regarding internet access, the unit head should ensure in advance of the visit that the site team will have access to reliable Wi-Fi and that all members of the site team have been completely cleared by the school’s IT department to log in and use it. Additionally, the unit is expected to confirm, well before the team’s arrival, that the computers the team will use are equipped with the necessary software to open, read and edit the site report and all associated files.
Many administrators find it useful to distribute a memo about the visit to faculty and students before the site-team visit. They also should inform them of the team’s recommendation after the team leaves. Administrators often give faculty members a copy of the team report.
On the last day of the visit, the team must provide its written report. The report is the culmination of the visit and is an important document. A draft must be completed before the team leaves the campus. The team is required to leave copies of the report, including the team’s recommendations regarding the accreditation status of the unit, with the unit head and with the chief executive officer of the institution (or the highest administrator of the institution on the campus at the time of the visit). Both administrators receive a copy of the report and an invitation to respond with questions, suggestions, objections and corrections of any factual errors.
Although the on-campus reporting process may vary because of schedules of campus officers, the team usually discusses its draft first with the head of the unit under review, and then with the chief executive officer of the institution. If possible, unit administrators should give the chief executive officer a copy of the report before the meeting between the CEO and the site team that takes place on the final day of the visit. At that meeting, the site-team chair should explain that the recommendation to accredit rests, first, with the Accrediting Committee, and the final decision rests with the Accrediting Council.
The site-team chair shall request errors of factual information or interpretation (if any) be corrected by the unit head in a report to be sent immediately to the site-team chair, with an informational copy sent to the ACEJMC executive director. The cover sheet of the team report includes a statement that it is a draft and may contain errors, that the school or institution may respond and offer corrections, and that the Council makes final accreditation decisions. Institution officials may file challenges of fact and judgment with the site-team chair during the two weeks following the visit. Upon receipt of the revised report from the unit and/or the institution, the site-team chair shall confer with other members of the team and make such alterations in the team’s report as they collectively deem appropriate.
Approximately two weeks after the site visit, the site-team chair forwards the team’s formal recommendation and final draft of the report to the ACEJMC executive director with copies to appropriate institution officials. When the team chair sends the team report to the executive director, the report is shared with ACEJMC Committee members and the Accrediting Council. Unit administrators may choose to share the final draft of the report publicly at any point during the process, but ACEJMC will not publish the report on its website until after the Council makes final accreditation decisions at its spring meeting.
The physical site visit establishes the frame of reference for the entire accrediting process. The accreditation decision is based on what is in place in the unit at the time of the site visit. The reaccreditation process is based on the activities, programs and materials the unit provided to students, faculty, alumni, parents and other interested parties since the previous site visit. Initial accreditation visits focus on the reporting and evidence in the self-study and any notable developments during the six-year review period. The site team makes its recommendation based on its observations, the self-study, and the catalog and other materials that the unit provides, and in comparison to the ACEJMC standards in place at the time of the visit.
The Accrediting Committee meets once a year, usually in March, to review site team reports. During this meeting, each site-team chair presents an executive summary of the site visit. Committee members often seek additional information from team chairs about the site visit and ask for clarification of information in the team report. The Committee then forwards its recommendations to the Accrediting Council, which meets later in the spring to consider accreditation decisions. The Committee chair presents the Committee’s recommendations to the Council. In the event a site team’s recommendation is overturned at the Committee level, the site team chair should be available during the Council meeting to answer any questions. The unit under review is responsible for paying any additional costs involved.
Meetings of both the Committee and the Council are open, and unit administrators or representatives are encouraged to attend to observe and to respond to questions from Committee or Council members.
The Council makes final decisions of accreditation status for the units under review. The president of the Council writes a letter to the institution’s chief executive officer with a copy to the unit administrator, informing them of the Council’s decision.
The letter contains a statement of any deficiencies noted and, when the decision is for provisional accreditation or denial, provides notice of the right to appeal.
Accreditation is for a six-year period. Council decisions fall into three categories — accreditation (either with or without one or more standards out of compliance), provisional accreditation, and denial.
A policy enacted in 2024-25 requires accredited units with a standard out of compliance to demonstrate, within three years, that the deficiencies have been rectified. When the Council accredits a program that the site team has cited for noncompliance on a standard, the unit head must submit a report to ACEJMC within one year outlining its plans to correct the deficiencies. The report should note issues that may delay quickly achieving compliance. Within the next two years after the one-year report is submitted, the unit head will be required to submit a final report with evidence showing compliance on the standard(s) at issue. A Council-appointed panel will review the unit’s final report and deliver its findings to the Council. Requests for extensions after the one-year report is submitted will be considered by the Council on a case-by-case basis.
A unit may receive provisional accreditation when the Council has found deficiencies that are serious enough to warrant reevaluation by a site team but are not so serious that they can’t be corrected in a relatively short period of time. The term of provisional accreditation is two years. A unit with provisional status has the option to schedule a revisit within one year of the time the provisional accreditation was granted. The site-team chair, accompanied by another individual agreed upon by the ACEJMC executive director and the unit, conducts a brief revisit near the end of the provisional period. The revisit team assesses the unit’s success in addressing deficiencies and writes a report, with an accreditation recommendation, that is considered by the Committee and Council. Provisional accreditation cannot be extended beyond established terms.
When the accreditation is provisional, the Council president includes details of the deficiencies and the process for Council reconsideration in a letter to the chief administrator of the institution. Provisional accreditation is a valuable opportunity for the unit to retain accredited status while it addresses and corrects deficiencies.
Units seeking first-time accreditation do not qualify for provisional accreditation. If a unit seeking first-time accreditation has deficiencies that place it below the qualifying threshold for accreditation, but those deficiencies are not serious enough to warrant denial, the unit will remain unaccredited while completing the corrective process for provisional programs as outlined above. Accreditation, if then granted, is in effect for the remainder of the original six-year accreditation cycle. For example, if a unit clears the deficiencies and is accredited at the end of the usual two-year corrective process, its accreditation will be in effect for four years.
If accreditation is denied, the school must wait at least two years to request an accreditation review and site visit. This subsequent review and site visit are treated as an initial review.
If a college or university containing a unit accredited by ACEJMC is placed on probationary status or has its regional or national accreditation revoked by a recognized accrediting agency, ACEJMC will review the unit’s accreditation status within 90 days to determine whether cause exists for withdrawal or other alteration of its ACEJMC accreditation status.
In the interest of public accountability and disclosure, ACEJMC requires accredited units to publish retention and graduation data in a prominent, easy-to-find place on their websites. Data must be updated annually by Aug. 15, and the ACEJMC office is to be notified of the update.
Units that do not meet this requirement will be placed on probation until the data are provided or until Aug. 15 of the following year, at which time the unit will be suspended.
A unit on probation will be listed as such on the website and in ACEJMC newsletters. The program must pay its annual dues while on probation.
A suspended program will be listed as such on ACEJMC’s website and in its newsletters. A suspended program will not pay dues. A suspended program will remain on the accreditation review cycle schedule, but a site visit will not be scheduled until the public accountability requirement is met.
A suspended program will be reinstated immediately when the data are published and dues are paid.
Information about all ACEJMC-accredited units can be found on ACEJMC’s website under the Accredited Programs tab. ACEJMC publishes a profile for each unit that includes a copy of the unit’s most recent accreditation decision letter and site team report, the unit’s accreditation/reaccreditation year, contact information, a list of accredited degree programs and areas of specialization offered, and a web link to the unit’s published student data including its most recent retention and graduation data.
Units that receive provisional accreditation have the option of a one-year or two-year provisional period in advance of the required revisit. A request for a revisit must be sent in writing from the unit administrator to the ACEJMC executive director’s office by July 1 preceding the academic year in which the revisit will occur. The ACEJMC executive director will coordinate with the unit and team chair to schedule the revisit between November and early February. The unit will receive a report template and copy of the original site-visit report. The report should be submitted to both the ACEJMC executive director’s office and the revisit team no later than six weeks before the revisit date.
Fees paid by units seeking accreditation or reaccreditation are intended to cover the total costs of conducting the site visits and a portion of the other expenses associated with the accreditation process, including Accrediting Committee and Council meetings and administrative staff work. The Council establishes the amount of the accreditation fees.
Domestic units seeking accreditation for the first time pay a $1,000 application fee; international units pay a $1,500 application fee. Fees are due at the time ACEJMC is invited to evaluate the unit and the site-visit date has been set. Should the invitation to ACEJMC be withdrawn before the site visit, this fee will not be returned. Additionally, units seeking accreditation/reaccreditation pay a $750 administrative fee to help cover the cost of the review process.
Units seeking accreditation or reaccreditation reimburse the Council for expenses incurred by the site-visit team for transportation, meals and other related costs. The unit will also reimburse ACEJMC for the cost of sending the site-team chair to the Accrediting Committee’s annual March meeting. The team chair attends this meeting to present the site team’s report to the Committee.
After the site visit has been completed and the site team members’ expense forms and receipts
have all been submitted to ACEJMC, ACEJMC administrative staff will send a single invoice to the unit requesting reimbursement for the total cost of the site visit. ACEJMC must receive this payment before the Council meeting, which typically occurs in early-May.
Following the team chair’s presentation to the Accrediting Committee, ACEJMC will bill the unit for the cost of the team chair’s attendance at the meeting. Payment is due before the Council meeting.
In the event the Accrediting Committee overturns the site team’s recommendation, the team chair must be available during the Council meeting when the final accreditation decisions are made. The unit under review is responsible for paying any additional costs involved.
When a two-person team revisits a unit with provisional status, the unit will pay for the cost of the revisit as well as the cost of sending the revisit team chair to the annual Accrediting Committee meeting to present the revisit report.
Costs for accreditation site visits vary, depending on factors such as the location of the unit and the size of the site team. The number of site team members is based on the size of the school, its enrollment, faculty headcount, and the number of areas/sequences under review. Most site teams comprise three to four members, but some teams may have as many as seven or more.
Lastly, all accredited units pay $2,500 in annual dues, payable in September/October each year.
See the ACEJMC 2026-2027 Journalism and Mass Communications Accreditation handbook, Part IV, Process of Accreditation, Pages 27-38.
