In the spring of 2002 we conducted a structure-focused case study at 4 North Carolina community colleges to understand how selected senior campus leaders assessed a new legislatively-mandated institutional-accountability program. Using confidential interviews and document analysis we collected, analyzed, and interpreted data that revealed clear differences in how leaders regarded the accountability program. These distinct, campus-specific perspectives are characterized as "bureaucratic meddling," "benign intrusion," "an opportunity to demonstrate accountability," and "the divided leaders." Despite these distinct perspectives, however, we also found 2 overarching themes that illuminated common reactions to the accountability program. First, leaders at 3 of the 4 institutions reported that performance ratings under the accountability program were instrumental in prompting changes in instructional programs or staffing. Second, faculty leaders at 3 institutions exhibited an apathy or unawareness of state indicators, even though some state funding was linked to measures regarding student performance.