California community colleges have been inconsistent in their efforts to meet the program review and planning accreditation standards established by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC). To assist colleges in their effort to meet the accreditation standards and to improve educational quality, the ACCJC developed the Rubric for Evaluating Institutional Effectiveness. The study was conducted in the spring of 2013 to explore the depth at which the rubrics are being utilized, if accreditation status is impacted by the utilization of the rubrics, and if the utilization of the rubrics influenced organizational change. In addition, the study examined faculty and administrator perceptions of the ACCJC's Rubric for Evaluating Institutional Effectiveness for program review and planning. A quantitative survey was used to explore the utilization of the program review and planning rubrics. The participants were faculty and administrators who were members of accreditation self-study committees at their institutions. The instrument was emailed to 447 faculty and administrators, with 212 of those who received a survey returning them. Independent samples t Tests and ANOVA's were run to identify differences between faculty and administrators. The results of the study showed that institutions are utilizing the program review and planning rubrics as intended and at multiple levels. There were statistically significant differences found for faculty and administrators in the areas of level of implementation and implementing change. The differences in perceptions between faculty and administrators were based on the district where they were employed, whether they were a member of an accreditation site team, and their institution's accreditation status. The data showed that there is a statistically significant difference among faculty and administrators on the utilization of the program review and planning rubrics affecting accreditation status. Finally, the results identified statistically significant differences between faculty and administrators at multiple stages within Kotter's Change Model. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]