5.1.1   The Architecture Program Report (APR)provides insight into the program and its institutional context and resources. It forms the basis for the visiting team to prepare for the site visit and evaluate evidence during the visit and also helps the team offer informed observations about the visit. Because of the APR’s central role in accreditation, the school is encouraged to draft the APR in collaboration with the school’s faculty, students, and appropriate members of the academic, practitioner, and regulatory communities.

5.1.2   Two copies of the completed APRaddressing each subsection described in the NAAB Conditions for Accreditation, 2004 edition,are due in the NAAB office by 7 September of the calendar year before the term of accreditation expires. A late fee is assessed for submissions received after that date. (See Appendix I.) Failure to submit an Architecture Program Report will result in a lapse of accredited status.

5.1.3   The NAAB conducts a workshop on APRpreparation at the ACSA Annual Meeting. Schools seeking sample APRs are encouraged to contact other schools with accredited degree programs to request such material.

5.2.1   Before the NAAB fall Board meeting, the designated visiting team chair reviews the APR for completeness and clarity, to discern the complexity of the program’s structure, and to identify issues that affect the size of the team or length and locales of the site visit.

5.2.2   The visiting team chair’s review results in a recommendation to the Board to do one of the following:

a)   Accept the APRand schedule the site visit;

b)   Accept the APR, schedule the site visit, and request additional information before the visit

c)   Require additional information to be submitted for Board review by 15 November and schedule the site visit if the information is acceptable

d)   Reject the APR, require a new report be submitted for review by 15 November, and schedule the site visit if the new version is acceptable. (Should the chair recommend the APR be rejected, the APR and the chair’s review are brought before the NAAB for review and action.)

5.2.3   Should the school fail to deliver an acceptable amended APR by 15 November, the chief academic officer of the institution is notified that the site visit cannot proceed and that accreditation may lapse.

5.3.1   Pending acceptance of the APR, a team is selected to visit the program. The team consists of a visiting team chair and visiting team members. The number of members depends on whether more than one degree program is being reviewed and whether the application is for continuing, initial, or reinstated accreditation. The visiting team chair carries significant responsibility before, during, and after the site visit. Team members represent the ACSA, AIA, NCARB, AIAS, and, on occasion, the NAAB.

5.3.2   One or two observers are mutually agreed upon by the school and the visiting team chair to be part of the team. To facilitate communication and foster a spirit of collaboration, the school is encouraged to nominate one or two program observers to the site visit. A program observer may be a member of the architecture community nominated by the program to offer insight into its unique qualities or history. Chairs from previous accreditation teams cannot serve as program observers for any school whose accrediting team they have previously chaired.

In addition, the NAAB may suggest visiting observers, including prospective team members, foreign visitors, NAAB consultants, observers from affiliated accrediting agencies, staff from collateral organizations, or NAAB staff members.

5.3.3   Visiting team chair nominations are made by the Executive Committee before the site visit based on a review of the resumes of former visiting team chairs and experienced visiting team members. Visiting team chairs may also be selected from among former Directors of the NAAB. The NAAB proposes a visiting team chair for acceptance by the program head, who may challenge the nomination for potential conflicts of interest. (See Section 5.5, Conflict of Interest.)

5.3.4   Except for the observers, team member nominations are made by the NAAB staff after a visit date has been chosen based on a review of the resumes of nominees received from the ACSA, AIA, NCARB, and AIAS. With the consent of the collateral organization he or she represents, a visiting team member may also be selected from among former Directors of the NAAB. The NAAB proposes a visiting team for acceptance by the program head, who may challenge no more than two nominations for potential conflict of interest. (See Section 5.5, Conflict of Interest.)

5.3.5   In addition to avoiding conflicts of interest, the NAAB makes every effort to ensure that team members and all observers have the following qualities:

a)   Be of sufficient professional stature to warrant the institution’s respect.

 b)   Hold a view of architecture that is sympathetic to that of the institution, even though they may not share the same view.

c)   Collectively represent a balance and diversity of views about architecture and education.

d)   Be diverse by geography, gender, and ethnicity.

5.3.6   To maintain uniform quality of visits and Visiting Team Reports (VTRs), teams are selected so that not more than one person, excluding the AIAS representative, is on his or her first visit.

5.4.1   Once the school accepts the proposed team, the NAAB invites the team members to serve, pending NAAB acceptance of the APR. The school invites the program observers to serve only after agreement is reached with the visiting team chair on who they should be.

5.4.2   The NAAB staff is responsible for ensuring that the visiting team chair, team members, and observers are informed of the following responsibilities (See Appendix B for the task list.):

a)   Reviewing Section 5.5, Conflict of Interest, and verifying to the NAAB office that no conflict of interest exists

b)   Making all travel arrangements at least 4 weeks in advance to secure economical fares

c)   Before the visit, reviewing the Conditions and the Procedures, the program’s APR, the format for the VTR, and the visiting team members’ resumes

d)   Thoroughly examining documentation in the team room as assigned by the visiting team chair

e)   Actively participating or observing, as applicable, in all aspects of the visit and carrying out all tasks assigned by the visiting team chair with integrity and timeliness

f)   Participating in writing the draft of the VTR, which should reflect the team’s consensus on all matters of substance, by the last night of the visit before the exit interviews

g)   Holding information in strictest confidence as specified in Section 8.2, Maintaining Confidentiality

h)   Abiding by the protocols set forth in Appendix C.

5.4.3   Visiting Team Chair. In conformance with NAAB policies and procedures throughout the preparation for and during the site visit, the visiting team chair is in charge. Before the visit, the visiting team chair works with the program head to develop a schedule, select observers, and offer advice on the content and organization of the team room.

a)   The visiting team chair schedules a conference call with the team (including observers) to discuss their responsibilities, stressing the preparation required before the visit.

b)   At the outset of the visit, the visiting team chair conducts an orientation for team members and obtains any additional documentation the team may need from the program head.

c)   The visiting team chair coordinates the final production of the VTR with the team members, submits the report to the NAAB staff no later than 30 calendar days after the visit, and consults with the staff on any corrections or clarifications requested by the program.

5.4.4   Team Members. All team members must contact the NAAB office to confirm their participation in the site visit at least 4 weeks before the visit. They must also formulate their views on the program’s critical accreditation issues before arrival on site. After the visit, each team member must promptly suggest any revisions to the visiting team chair on the draft VTR.

5.4.5   Observers. All observers must participate throughout the entire site visit including orientation, entry meetings, evidence confirmation, and exit meetings. They are encouraged to offer comments and advice to the visiting team chair, team members, program, or institution.

a)   Observers do not share in formal team decisions concerning its recommendation on the term of accreditation and may be present at the last team work session solely at the discretion of the visiting team chair.

b)   All observers must agree in advance on the principles of confidentiality as outlined in Section 8.2, Maintaining Confidentiality.

5.5.1   Because the NAAB seeks to avoid any conflict of interest in its procedures, deliberations, and accrediting decisions, no person shall take part as a visiting team member and no Board member shall participate in an accrediting decision or the deliberations leading thereto if he or she cannot evaluate a program objectively without bias even if none of the categories for automatic disqualification set forth in Section 5.5.4 applies.

For purposes of Section 5.5, the term “program” shall include, in addition to the program specifically to be evaluated, any previous program, substitute program, or other program at the institution regardless of its degree title, that has received or is seeking NAAB accreditation.

5.5.2   The NAAB shall not assign an individual to serve on a visiting team to evaluate a program if it appears that the individual has a conflict of interest, or appearance of a conflict of interest, that would raise a question as to that individual’s objectivity regarding the evaluation.

a)   Except as set forth in b) below, no individual shall be assigned more than once to serve as a member of a visiting team for the same program. This provision shall also apply to observers on a visiting team.

b)   If a program received less than the maximum term of accreditation during its last accreditation cycle, then, with the express agreement of the program, one member of the last visiting team or observer on the visiting team may be assigned to the subsequent visiting team.

5.5.3   Board members and potential team members (but not observers) are responsible for determining and reporting whenever they have a conflict of interest, or appearance of a conflict of interest, with regard to a particular accreditation matter. Before serving as a team member or participating in any decision on the matter, an individual shall inform the Board if such a conflict or appearance of a conflict exists.

a)   An individual, in determining whether he or she should be disqualified from participation shall consider, even in the absence of a true conflict of interest, whether the potential appearance of a conflict of interest is sufficiently serious to dictate the individual’s withdrawal from participation.

b)   When considering whether he or she has a conflict of interest or apparent conflict of interest that would prevent the individual from taking part in the evaluation of a program, the individual should take into account such matters (nonexclusive) as these:

1)   Graduation from the institution in which the program being evaluated is located

2)   Close association with administrative or faculty personnel in the program or at the institution at which the program is located

3)   Having relatives or close friends who are associated with the program or the institution at which it is located

4)   Holding a preconceived opinion based on the type of program to be evaluated, its reputation, the underlying philosophy of the program, the extent of expected faculty research, the extent to which it is an undergraduate or graduate program, and so on.

5.5.4   No person shall serve as a visiting team member and no Board member shall take part in the deliberations or decision regarding the accreditation of a program under the following circumstances:

a)   The individual has, or has had, a direct relationship to the program being evaluated, as an employee, current or former student, or graduate of this program.

b)   Within the past 10 years the individual, whether paid or unpaid, has had a limited relationship with the program being evaluated as a temporary employee, visiting faculty member, recipient of an honor, speaker on more than a single occasion, volunteer teacher or mentor, consultant, or financial supporter.

c)   With regard to the program to be evaluated, the individual is seeking, or at any time in the past has unsuccessfully sought, permanent employment or a relationship of the types set forth in 5.5.4 b).

d)     The individual or a member of the individual’s immediate family (including the individual’s spouse, child, parent, or sibling and the immediate family of the spouse, child, or sibling) is an employee of, or is seeking employment with, the institution in which the program is located.

 

Exceptions to the above policy may be made if approved by an administrator of the program in writing or if the program fails to make a timely objection to a substitution necessary on short notice.