For HLC-Accredited Institutions
Build the Assurance Argument your institution has already earned.
HLC's Criteria for Accreditation ask institutions to demonstrate continuous quality improvement through evidence — not promises. Campus Credit gives ALOs, Provosts, and Registrars the systematic, auditable enrollment workflows that turn day-to-day operations into a compelling Assurance Filing — and keep institutions ISR-clean between review cycles.
Degree-granting institutions accredited by HLC — the largest regional accreditor in the United States
Comprehensive review cycle — with Assurance Filing, annual data updates, and interim monitoring throughout
Assumed Practices compliance is required at all times — not just during review years. Non-compliance triggers probation.
Federal Compliance component areas reviewed at every Assurance Review — several map directly to Campus Credit workflows
ALOs read action letters — here's what they're reading about
The risks aren't hypothetical. HLC's public action letters document real institutional consequences when dual credit, CPL, and transfer workflows break down. These are the outcomes every ALO is watching for — and working to prevent. Campus Credit is built to keep institutions out of these situations.
An internal audit revealed approximately one-quarter of dual credit instructors did not fully meet either the institution's own faculty qualifications policies or HLC's Assumed Practice B.2. The program's former director had been terminated for fraud. Partner high schools severed dual credit relationships. The institution was required to submit two Embedded Reports with the next Year 4 Assurance Review.
The HLC Board continued accreditation but found Core Components 3.A, 3.C, 4.B, and 5.C met with concerns. The 3.C finding specifically cited the need to clarify faculty qualifications policy to provide differential evaluation of faculty teaching at lower vs. upper division undergraduate levels. An interim report is due May 31, 2028 with an embedded interim report required in the next Assurance Filing.
A recurring finding across multiple action letters: institutions that award CPL credit through informal processes — without published written criteria covering military service, employment, and demonstrated competency — cannot satisfy Assumed Practice B.1.f. The absence of faculty evaluation records makes credit awards indefensible during peer review, triggering monitoring requirements and interim reports.
Campus Credit directly addresses each of these failure modes — before they appear in your Institutional Status and Requirements (ISR) Report in Canopy.
The recurring findings Campus Credit is built to prevent
These aren't edge cases — they appear repeatedly in HLC action letters and peer review reports across institution types. Each one reflects a workflow gap that systematic documentation prevents.
Instructors teaching credit-bearing dual credit courses at partner high schools lack the required 18 graduate credit hours in the discipline — and the institution has no systematic process for tracking or documenting compliance.
✓ Campus Credit tracks instructor qualifications per course and flags gaps before peer review
Credit for prior learning is awarded on a case-by-case basis with no published written criteria covering military service, employment, or demonstrated competency — and no documented faculty evaluator involvement. Assumed Practice B.1.f requires both.
✓ Campus Credit creates a documented, criteria-driven CPL petition process with faculty records
Transfer credit policies are published in the catalog but aren't consistently interpreted across offices. Evaluators find that the policy students read doesn't match the practice they experience — a direct Criterion 2.B transparency failure.
✓ Campus Credit standardizes evaluation criteria and creates an auditable record of every transfer decision
Criterion 4 requires institutions to evaluate credit-awarding effectiveness over time. Institutions that collect CPL, dual credit, and transfer outcome data but don't systematically analyze or act on it fail to demonstrate the continuous improvement loop HLC requires.
✓ Campus Credit's reporting tools close the loop with program effectiveness analytics across all pathways
Institutions with a single faculty qualifications policy for all courses — without distinguishing lower vs. upper division requirements — are increasingly receiving "meets with concerns" findings on Core Component 3.C, as seen in recent Board actions.
✓ Campus Credit's instructor tracking supports level-differentiated qualification documentation
Institutions that allow students to earn credit through partner institutions abroad — without documented oversight of course equivalency, faculty qualifications, or learning outcomes — cannot demonstrate Criterion 3.A compliance for those credits.
✓ Campus Credit's study abroad module documents institutional authority and credit evaluation for every program
Open Pathway or Standard Pathway — your enrollment evidence requirements are identical
HLC offers two pathways for reaffirmation. Both involve an Assurance Filing with an Assurance Argument — a peer-reviewed narrative demonstrating compliance with all five Criteria and all Assumed Practices. Campus Credit builds the evidence for that argument continuously, across both pathways.
Quality Initiative + Assurance Review
The Open Pathway pairs an institution-driven Quality Initiative project with a comprehensive Assurance Review. Enrollment documentation must satisfy all five Criteria and all Assumed Practices regardless of which pathway you're on.
.svg)
Years 1–9 — Annual Institutional Update data submissions to HLC via Canopy
Year 4 — Quality Initiative Report demonstrating institutional improvement work
Year 10 — Comprehensive Assurance Review with peer reviewer evaluation
Ongoing — ISR (Institutional Status & Requirements) Report in Canopy tracks all open items
Comprehensive Evaluation at Year 10
The Standard Pathway culminates in a full comprehensive evaluation with an Assurance Filing and peer review team visit. Institutions build an Assurance Argument — a narrative with embedded evidence — demonstrating compliance with all Criteria.
Years 1–9 — Annual Institutional Update data submissions to HLC via Canopy
Year 4 — Assurance Filing with Assurance Argument submitted for peer review
Year 10 — Full Comprehensive Evaluation with on-site peer review team
Ongoing — ISR Report tracks compliance status; Embedded Reports may be required
Embedded Reports are the more demanding monitoring mechanism — and they're triggered by Criteria findings
When peer reviewers find Core Components "met with concerns," HLC may require an Embedded Report — a formal report submitted simultaneously with your next Assurance Filing, addressing the specific concern. This is distinct from a standalone Interim Report. Embedded Reports are increasingly common in dual credit and CPL-related findings, as seen in recent Board actions. Campus Credit makes the documentation trail for both types of reports straightforward to produce.
Assumed Practices aren't reviewed on a cycle — they're required at all times
HLC's Assumed Practices are the non-negotiable baseline beneath the five Criteria. Non-compliance can trigger Probation or a Show-Cause Order regardless of where an institution is in its review cycle. Several Assumed Practices directly govern the workflows Campus Credit manages.
These apply to every HLC institution, at all times, regardless of review cycle position
Campus Credit ensures the following Assumed Practice requirements are met through systematic, documented workflows — not informal processes that unravel under peer review scrutiny.
HLC's five Criteria — revised September 2025 — and where Campus Credit fits
HLC updated its Criteria for Accreditation in June 2024, effective September 2025. The revised Criteria place greater emphasis on mission-driven evidence and institutional sustainability. Campus Credit directly supports evidence requirements under Criteria 3, 4, and 5.
The institution's mission is publicly articulated and guides all operations. Campus Credit supports Criterion 1 by connecting noncredit, community education, and experiential programs to mission fulfillment documentation across the institution.
Core Component 2.B requires accurate, complete, and public presentation of institutional information — including transfer credit policies and articulation agreements. Campus Credit's public disclosure exports ensure what's published stays current and accurate.
Standard 5 addresses the full admissions and student services landscape — including services for international students. Institutions must demonstrate systematic evaluation of student services and adequate support for all student populations.
HLC requires institutions to evaluate all credit they transcript — including CPL and experiential learning. Core Component 4.B requires policies ensuring quality of transfer credit and evaluation of all credit-awarding arrangements over time to demonstrate continuous improvement.
Criterion 5 requires institutions to demonstrate that planning integrates enrollment forecasts, financial capacity, student learning assessment, and the external environment. Campus Credit's reporting and analytics feed this evidence requirement directly.
HLC's Federal Compliance Filing reviews nine component areas at every Assurance Review. Several map directly to Campus Credit workflows — including transfer policy publication, student identity verification, student privacy, and Title IV responsibilities. See the full mapping below.
HLC's nine Federal Compliance areas — mapped to Campus Credit
Every HLC Assurance Review includes a Federal Compliance Filing covering nine specific component areas. These are checked at every review — and several align directly with the workflows Campus Credit manages.
Federal Compliance Component
What Reviewers Verify
Campus Credit Coverage
Assignment of Credits & Program Length
Credit hours assigned consistently with federal definition; dual credit and CPL credits documented accordingly
✓ Direct
Publication of Transfer Policies
Transfer credit policies publicly disclosed and accessible; list of articulation partner institutions published
✓ Direct
Practices for Verification of Student Identity
Institution verifies that students in distance and online courses are the enrolled students; privacy protected; costs disclosed
✓ Direct
Protection of Student Privacy
FERPA compliance; role-based access to student records; identity verification costs disclosed prior to enrollment
✓ Direct
Title IV Program Responsibilities
Compliance with federal financial aid requirements; satisfactory academic progress policies; default rate monitoring
~ Supporting
Institutional Records of Student Complaints
Process for handling and documenting student complaints; records maintained and accessible for review
~ Supporting
Process for handling and documenting student complaints; records maintained and accessible for review
Graduation rates, retention rates, and other outcome data published and accessible to prospective students
~ Supporting
Standing with State & Other Accreditors
Institution in good standing with state authorization and relevant programmatic accreditors
Not applicable
Public Notification of Opportunity to Comment
Public notice of HLC evaluation provided; opportunity for public comment facilitated per HLC policy
Not applicable
Six enrollment workflows — built to satisfy HLC's Criteria and Assumed Practices
Campus Credit unifies six enrollment workflows in one platform. Each module generates the systematic documentation HLC peer reviewers look for in an Assurance Review — evidence that your processes are defined, applied consistently, and continuously improved.
Assumed Practice B.2 requires institutions to document that dual credit courses are equivalent in learning outcomes to on-campus curriculum — and that all instructors meet faculty qualification processes. This is HLC's most frequently cited dual credit finding. Campus Credit builds the institutional oversight record that keeps this finding out of your Assurance Report.
Instructor qualification tracking — including 18 graduate credit hour verification
Course equivalency and learning outcome documentation by section
Student eligibility verification and enrollment management
Achievement and completion data for Criterion 4 effectiveness evidence
Embedded Report-ready audit trails for all dual credit activity
Assumed Practice B.1.f requires written CPL criteria covering military service, paid and unpaid employment, and demonstrated competency — publicly available and consistently applied. Criterion 4.B requires evaluation of all transcripted credit. Campus Credit creates the documented faculty oversight record that makes CPL awards indefensible to challenge.
Written evaluation criteria for all CPL types, publicly accessible
Portfolio, challenge exam, ACE, and military transcript workflows
Faculty evaluator assignment with rubric-based oversight documentation
Student learning achievement records for credit equivalency defense
CPL award analytics for Criterion 4 continuous improvement evidence
HLC's Federal Compliance Filing verifies that transfer policies are publicly disclosed and consistently applied — and that what's in the catalog matches what's practiced. Criterion 2.B adds transparency requirements. Campus Credit replaces informal evaluation with a documented, policy-aligned system that satisfies both.
Agreement creation, version control, and expiration tracking
Course equivalency mapping with documented evaluation criteria
Public disclosure exports for catalog and web compliance
Resident credit minimum tracking (30/120 bachelor's, 15/60 associate's)
Annual review workflows to keep all agreements current
HLC's mission-driven framework requires all programs — including noncredit and continuing education — to align with and advance the institution's publicly articulated mission. Campus Credit connects community ed to your Criterion 1 and Criterion 5 evidence, bringing it under the same institutional quality infrastructure as credit programs.
Course catalog, section management, and online registration
Completion certificates and noncredit transcript records
Noncredit-to-credit pathway mapping and student progression data
Program review data for Criterion 1 mission alignment evidence
Enrollment and completion reporting for Criterion 5 planning
Criterion 3.A requires institutional authority over all credit-bearing programs wherever and however delivered — including study abroad. Institutions that allow credit through partner institutions abroad without documented course equivalency and faculty oversight cannot demonstrate Criterion 3.A compliance for those credits.
Partner institution agreement tracking with institutional authority documentation
Pre-departure academic planning and credit equivalency mapping
Health, safety, and risk management documentation
Credit transfer evaluation with faculty review records
Learning outcome documentation for Criterion 4 assessment evidence
Assumed Practice B.3 specifically addresses identity verification for distance education students. HLC's Federal Compliance Filing checks this at every Assurance Review. For institutions enrolling F-1 students, SEVIS compliance adds another layer of required documentation. Campus Credit covers both through a single auditable workflow.
I-20 generation, updates, and batch printing workflows
OPT, CPT, and STEM OPT authorization and tracking
SEVIS reporting and enrollment status management
Identity verification compliance documentation (AP B.3)
Visa document storage with permanent, secure FERPA-ready records
Campus Credit makes your Assurance Argument stronger — and faster to write
HLC peer reviewers evaluate an Assurance Argument by looking for evidence that each Core Component is met — not just described. For enrollment-related Criteria, Campus Credit gives your ALO, Provost, and Registrar the documentation they need to write confidently, not defensively.
What HLC peer reviewers look for in your Assurance Argument
What Campus Credit gives you to answer with
How Campus Credit maps to HLC's Criteria and Assumed Practices
Use this as a reference when preparing your Assurance Argument, responding to Embedded Report requirements, or addressing peer reviewer findings. Each HLC requirement is mapped to the Campus Credit module that directly supports it.
HLC Criterion / Assumed Practice
Requirement Summary
Campus Credit Module
Support
Criterion 3.A · AP B.2
Institution maintains authority over faculty qualifications, course rigor, and learning outcomes for all programs including dual credit; dual credit courses must be equivalent in outcomes to higher education curriculum
Dual Credit Module · Faculty Qualification Tracking
Direct
Criterion 4.B · AP B.1.f
Institution evaluates all credit it transcripts including CPL; written criteria for CPL covering military service, employment, and demonstrated competency — publicly available and consistently applied
CPL Workflow · Faculty Evaluation Tools
Direct
Criterion 4.B · AP A.5
Policies ensuring quality of transfer credit; publicly disclosed including how credits apply to degree requirements; consistently interpreted and applied throughout the institution
Articulation Library · Public Disclosure Exports
Direct
AP B.1.f (Resident Credit)
Minimum 30 of 120 credits (bachelor's) and 15 of 60 credits (associate's) earned at institution or approved arrangements; any variation documented and justified
Articulation Manager · Resident Credit Tracking
Direct
Federal Compliance · AP B.3
Identity verification for distance education students; student privacy protected and FERPA compliance maintained; students informed of any additional costs for verification
International / F-1 Module · Secure Records
Direct
Federal Compliance (Transfer)
Transfer policies publicly disclosed; list of articulation agreements accessible; credit hour assignment consistent with federal definition across all credit types including dual credit and CPL
Articulation Library · Credit Assignment Tracking
Direct
Criterion 3.A (All Delivery)
Institution maintains authority over all locations, modalities, and venues wherever and however delivered — including distance delivery, dual credit, study abroad, and contractual arrangements
Study Away / Abroad · Noncredit · Full Platform
Supporting
Criterion 5
Resources, structures, and processes sufficient to fulfill mission; planning integrates enrollment forecasts, financial capacity, student learning assessment, and institutional operations data
Reporting Dashboards · Enrollment Analytics
Supporting
Criterion 2.B
Institution presents itself accurately and completely to students, prospective students, and the public; transfer credit policies, articulation agreements, and all program information publicly accessible
Public Disclosure Exports · Articulation Library
Direct
What HLC requires — and what institutions are navigating
These requirements come directly from HLC's Criteria for Accreditation and Assumed Practices. Campus Credit is built to make demonstrating compliance with each of them systematic rather than stressful.
HLC requires institutions to maintain and exercise authority over the prerequisites, rigor, and expected learning outcomes for all programs — including dual credit — and to ensure that dual credit courses for high school students are equivalent in learning outcomes and achievement levels to their higher education curriculum.
HLC requires institutions to evaluate all the credit they transcript — including credit awarded for experiential learning or other forms of prior learning — and to have policies that ensure the quality of credit accepted in transfer.
HLC's Assumed Practices require institutions to have written criteria used to evaluate and award credit for prior learning experience — including, but not limited to, service in the armed forces, paid or unpaid employment, or other demonstrated competency. These practices are required at all times.
HLC requires that if an institution issues credit for a course — even if the course is offered by another entity — the instructor must meet the institution's policies and procedures on instructor qualifications. This obligation extends to all instructors, including any other entities to whom the institution assigns instruction.
Keep your institution ISR-clean. Let's walk through it together.
Schedule a 30-minute walkthrough with your ALO, Provost, or Registrar — we'll map Campus Credit to your Criteria, Assumed Practices, and any open items in your ISR Report.
