STATE AUTHORIZATION REGULATION:UPDATE AND STATE EXAMPLES

Jeannie Yockey-Fine, Dow Lohnes PLLC

Marianne Boeke, National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS)

WCET Annual Conference

October 31, 2012

AGENDA

Marianne Boeke (NCHEMS)

• Survey Results 2011 Vs. 2012• SHEEO Update• Common Questions

Jeannie Yockey-Fine (Dow Lohnes PLLC)

• State Agency Examples • Stay Tuned…

Discussion with Participants

SURVEY RESULTS – 2011 VS. 2012

How Many State Agencies:

• 69 - 70 state agencies

How Many State Agencies Completed the Survey:

• 61 - 58 completed

How Many State Agencies Are Missing:

• 8 - 12 missing

•Numbers above reflect the United States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico

•NOT included are the 7 US Territories

SURVEY RESULTS – JUNE 2012

STATE AGENCIES THAT HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO SURVEY

Alabama Alabama Secretary of State

Connecticut Connecticut Board of Regents for Higher Education

Hawaii (no agency)

Indiana Indiana Commission for Higher Education

Indiana Indiana Department of Workforce Development

Kentucky Kentucky State Board for Proprietary Education

New Jersey New Jersey Secretary of Higher Education

New JerseyNew Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Center for Occupational Employment Information

New York New York Office of College and University Evaluation

North Carolina North Carolina Community College System, Office of Proprietary Schools

Oklahoma Oklahoma Department of Career and Technology Education

South Dakota South Dakota Secretary of State

SURVEY RESULTS – JUNE 2012

State Definitions Clarified Private Institution (NV and FL) Physical Presence

State Web Sites Improved Alaska Florida Utah Wisconsin

Complaint Process – Up and Running

State Regulators

SURVEY RESULTS – JUNE 2012

3 States Have Added Agencies:

• Alabama• Connecticut• Indiana

18 State Agencies Require Authorization Regardless of Physical Presence. In 2011 it was 12.

Individual States Made Changes – But The Overall National Trend Is The Same

SURVEY RESULTS - SCOPE OF AUTHORIZATION

OCTOBER 2011 JUNE 2012

Both Institutions and Programs:

31 Agencies45%

Institutions Only:13 Agencies

19%

Programs Only: 10 Agencies

14%

No Answer:15 Agencies

22%

State Authorization Agencies:Scope of Authorization

Both:33 Agencies

47%

Institutions only:13 Agencies

19%

Only Programs:10 Agencies

14%

No Answer:14 Agencies

20%

State Authorization Agencies:Scope of Authorization

SURVEY RESULTS - EXEMPTIONS AVAILABLE

OCTOBER 2011 JUNE 2012

Yes48 Agencies

70%

No7 Agencies

10%

No Answer14 Agencies

20%

Exemptions Available for Some Institutions?

Yes48 Agencies

68%

No9 Agencies

13%

No Answer13 Agencies

19%

Exemptions Available for Some Institutions?

SURVEY RESULTS - PHYSICAL PRESENCE TRIGGERS

OCTOBER 2011 JUNE 2012

2

22

14

22

10

18

28 3033

23

3529

36

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Nati

onal

med

ia so

urce

s

Loca

l med

ia so

urce

s

Proc

tore

d Ex

ams

Stud

ent S

ervi

ces

Facu

lty se

rvin

g out

-of-

stat

e st

uden

ts

Facu

lty se

rvin

g in

-sta

te st

uden

ts

Men

tors

, tut

ors,

or p

rece

ptor

s

Serv

ers o

r Oth

er Eq

uipm

ent

Faci

lity o

r Ins

truc

tiona

l Site

Occ

asio

nal r

ecru

iting

Org

aniz

ed, c

onsi

sten

t, O

TG re

crui

ting

Inte

rnsh

ip, e

xter

nshi

p, e

tc.

Shor

t ter

m, f

ace

to fa

ce se

min

ars

Advertising 3rd Party Contracts Employment of Faculty, Staff, Mentors

Institutional Property Recruiting Activities Instructional Activities

Physical Presence Triggers

4

24

15

24

8

17

30 3033

24

3730

39

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Nati

onal

med

ia so

urce

s

Loca

l med

ia so

urce

s

Proc

tore

d Ex

ams

Stud

ent S

ervi

ces

Facu

lty se

rvin

g out

-of-

stat

e st

uden

ts

Facu

lty se

rvin

g in

-sta

te st

uden

ts

Men

tors

, tut

ors,

or p

rece

ptor

s

Serv

ers o

r Oth

er Eq

uipm

ent

Faci

lity o

r Ins

truc

tiona

l Site

Occ

asio

nal r

ecru

iting

Org

aniz

ed, c

onsi

sten

t, O

TG re

crui

ting

Inte

rnsh

ip, e

xter

nshi

p, e

tc.

Shor

t ter

m, f

ace

to fa

ce se

min

ars

Advertising 3rd Party Contracts Employment of Faculty, Staff, Mentors

Institutional Property Recruiting Activities Instructional Activities

Physical Presence Triggers

SURVEY RESULTS – JUNE 2012

Although Individual States Made Changes – Overall National Trend Is The Same…

Which Means:

• We Did Not See The Majority of States Moving Away from Complex Regulations/Policies

• We Did Not See The Majority of States Pushing Through New State Legislation on State Authorization

Reciprocity Is Still A Viable Option

SHEEO SURVEY UPDATES

SHEEO Is Working On:

• Updating all agency surveys (twice per year)• Continued analysis of survey data• Monitoring the federal regulations

Available On SHEEO State Authorization Website:

• Survey results – by state• Contact list of state regulators• Complaint process and links list****• Fees structure summary

Analysis Of Selected Data

COMMON QUESTIONS ABOUT AUTHORIZATION REGULATIONS

1. Is There a List of “Hard” States?

• Private/Public; Not for Profit/For Profit; Degree/Non-Degree• WCET Paper

2. If An Institution Offers Non-Degree Courses/Programs – We Don’t Need to Worry About State Authorization, Right?

3. What About Military Students?

4. What About the U.S. Territories?

5. My Institution is Authorized… Now What?

STATE AGENCY EXAMPLES

• Maryland

• Massachusetts

• Ohio

• Oklahoma

• Texas

STAY TUNED…

• United States Department of Education (USDOE)

• United States Department of Defense (USDOD)

• Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)

• Reciprocity

THANK YOU!

For more information, please contact us at:

Jeannie Yockey-Fine (Dow Lohnes PLLC)JYockey-Fine@dowlohnes.com

Marianne Boeke (NCHEMS)marianne@nchems.org

SHEEO state authorization website:http://www.sheeo.org/stateauth/stateauth-home.htm