The Commission denied the institution initial accreditation because, based on the institution’s self-study, the report of the evaluation team and the response of the institution to the team report, it determined that the institution is not in substantial compliance with the Standards for Accreditation. The judgment of “being in substantial compliance” or “being out of compliance” is a qualitative judgment made by the Commission, consisting of peers and members of the public that the institution meets the underlying purpose of the standard. In making this judgment the Commission gives principal attention to the statement of the standard for each of the Commission’s Standards for Accreditation. So long as the institution is otherwise in good standing as a candidate, it will be continued in that status up to the maximum allowable time as a candidate. Institutions denied accreditation and continued in candidacy must subsequently seek accreditation in keeping with the policies and procedures of the Commission. If the institution’s candidacy is withdrawn and it subsequently seeks affiliation, it must complete the entire process required of applying institutions as prescribed by the policies and procedures of the Commission.