Please click on the Institution’s Name for additional Information.
Former Name: {{institution.former_names}}
View Website Public Sanctions: {{getStrippedSanction(institution.sanctions)}}

Back to Results

As of {{current_date}}
Former Name: {{detail.former_names}}

The information on this page describes the accreditation relationship between this institution and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges. General information about the Commission and the accreditation process is provided at the end of this document. In addition, links to definitions are provided for many of the terms used.

General Information

CEO Name
{{detail.address_city}}, {{detail.address_state}} {{detail.address_zip}}
Institutional Phone
Approved to Offer
Associate's Degree
Baccalaureate Degree
Master's Degree
Education Specialist Degree
Doctoral Degree

Accreditation Information

Public Sanctions
Accreditation Actions & Disclosure Statements
Candidacy Date
Accreditation Granted
Distance Education Approval Date
Next Reaffirmation
Next Fifth-Year Review
Degree Level

Accreditation History


SACSCOC Staff Member

{{detail.contact_first_name}} {{detail.contact_last_name}}

In-Progress Reviews


Most Recent History with SACSCOC


Off-campus Instructional Sites (Additional Locations)


  • Approved >=50%: Site is approved to offer any portion of a program. Additional programs may be offered with no further site notification or approval. Only sites offering 50% or more of a program require approval.
  • Approved Branch >=50%: Site is approved as a branch campus to offer any portion of a program. Additional programs may be offered with no further site notification or approval.
  • Approved Cert >=50%: Site is approved to offer any portion of a certificate program only. Additional certificate programs, or up to 50% of non-certificate programs, may be offered with no further site notification or approval.
  • Notified 25-49%: Less than 50% of a program may be offered at the site. Less than 50% of additional programs may be offered with no further site notification.
  • Sites offering less than 25% of a program do not require notification or approval.


  • Open: Instruction may be offered at the site consistent with the site type defined above.
  • Closed: Closed sites are not shown. A site is closed when (1) the institution has stopped admitting students to the site and (2) SACSCOC has approved the site teach-out plan. Therefore, instruction may continue at a site under the teach-out plan after the site is closed.
{{}}, {{site.state}} {{}}
Type: {{site.type}}
Status: {{site.status}}


The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) is the regional commission responsible for accrediting degree‐granting institutions in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and some institutions in Latin America and other international sites approved by the SACSCOC Board of Trustees. The SACSCOC Board of Trustees is the representative body of the member institutions also known as the College Delegate Assembly. To gain or maintain accreditation, an institution must comply with SACSCOC policies, procedures, and with all standards contained in the Principles of Accreditation: Foundations for Quality Enhancement in the professional judgment of peer reviewers. SACSCOC’s institutional accreditation includes all degree levels regardless of location or mode of instruction.

Regional accreditation agencies are recognized by the U.S. Department of Education to accredit degree-granting colleges and universities. There are six regions of the United States which regional agencies oversee. Regional accreditation validates the quality of an institution as a whole and evaluates multiple aspects of an institution, including its academic offerings, governance and administration, mission, finances, and resources. Institutions of higher education in the United States may also seek accreditation through national or specialized accreditation agencies. National accreditation associations, like regional accreditors, accredit the institution as a whole. Specialized accreditation agencies accredit programs, departments or schools within a college or university.

Components of the Review Process

The SACSCOC Board of Trustees conducts several types of institutional reviews: (1) Candidate Committee reviews of applicant institutions seeking candidacy, (2) Accreditation Committee reviews of candidate institutions seeking initial membership, (3) Reaffirmation Committee reviews of member institutions seeking continued accreditation following a comprehensive review, (4) Special Committee reviews of member institutions seeking continued accreditation following evaluation of institutional circumstances that are accreditation related, and (5) Substantive Change Committee reviews of member institutions seeking approval and continued accreditation following the review of a change of a significant modification or expansion to the institution’s nature and scope. Each of the above type of reviews has its own evaluation documents and peer review procedures and can be found on the SACSCOC website at

The Committees on Compliance and Reports (C&R), standing committees of the SACSCOC Board of Trustees, review reports prepared by evaluation committees and the institutional responses to those reports. A C&R Committee’s recommendation regarding an institution’s accreditation-related matters is forwarded to the Executive Council for review. The Executive Council recommends action to the SACSCOC Board of Trustees, which makes the final decision on reaffirmation and any monitoring activities that it may require of an institution. The SACSCOC Board of Trustees convenes twice a year.

Complaints Against SACSCOC Accredited Institutions

The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) recognizes the value of information provided by students, employees, and others in determining whether an institution’s performance is consistent with SACSCOC standards for obtaining or maintaining accreditation. The Commission’s interest also is in ensuring that member institutions maintain appropriate grievance procedures and standards of procedural fairness and that the procedures are applied appropriately and consistently. The procedures for the review of complaints involving member institutions enable SACSCOC to address possible violations of its Principles of Accreditation, its Core Requirements and Standards, SACSCOC policies or procedures, as well as to address possible violations of an institution’s own policies and procedures, if related to the Principles.

Since SACSCOC’s complaint procedures are for the purpose of addressing any significant non-compliance with SACSCOC Principles of Accreditation, policies, or procedures, the procedures are not intended to be used to involve SACSCOC in disputes between individuals and member institutions, or cause SACSCOC to interpose itself as a reviewing authority in individual matters of admission, grades, granting or transferability of credits, application of academic policies, fees or other financial matters, disciplinary matters or other contractual rights and obligations. Nor does SACSCOC seek redress on an individual’s behalf. Under no circumstances does SACSCOC respond to, or take action on, any complaint or any allegation that contains defamatory statements. Further, SACSCOC will not serve as a grievance panel when the outcome of institutional grievance or appeal processes is unsatisfactory to the complainant.

SACSCOC expects individuals to attempt to resolve the issue through all means available to the complainant, including following the institution’s own published grievance procedures, before submitting a complaint to SACSCOC. Therefore, SACSCOC is under no obligation to consider additional information submitted by the complainant subsequent to the receipt of the formal complaint. SACSCOC’s usual practice is not to consider a complaint that is currently in administrative proceedings, including institutional proceedings, or in litigation. However, if there is substantial, credible evidence that indicates systemic problems with an accredited institution, SACSCOC may, at its discretion, choose to proceed with the review.

In order for review by SACSCOC personnel, a formal complaint must be submitted in writing using the SACSCOC “Complaints Against Institutions: Information Sheet and Form,” signed, and two copies mailed to: President, Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, 1866 Southern Lane, Decatur, Georgia, 30033-4097. SACSCOC will not review oral or anonymous complaints, and it will not consider complaints sent electronically or through facsimile transmission. In addition, SACSCOC will not act on complaints submitted on behalf of another individual or complaints forwarded to SACSCOC from another entity.