Presenters Marshall A. Hill Executive Director National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements 3005 Center Green Drive, Suite 130 Boulder,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reliability Center Data Request Task Force Report WECC Board Meeting April 2009.
Advertisements

Electronic Campus The Approval Process April 24, 2013.
UPDATE ON STATE AUTHORIZATION FOR DISTANCE EDUCATION: REGULATIONS & RECIPROCITY Legal Issues in Higher Education December 12, 2013 WICHE Cooperative for.
Presenters Marshall A. Hill Executive Director National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements 3005 Center Green Drive, Suite 130 Boulder,
Credentialing, Accreditation, Certification, Registration, and Licensure: What does it all mean? Donna Nowakowski, MS, RN Associate Executive Director.
SREB State Authorization Advisory Committee Meeting April 30-May 1, 2013 Atlanta.
Electronic Campus Process & Procedures April 22, 2013.
State Authorization: past, present and future Presentation at The UMassOnline Symposium 7 March 2012 Online Higher Education Learning Collaborative.
Developing and Managing Great Recovery Residence Provider Organizations.
Southern Regional Education Board Cheryl Blanco, Vice President, Special Projects Southern Regional Education Board (SREB)
Southern Regional Education Board Corpus Christi, Texas April 3, 2014 State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (SARA) A Regional and National View Texas.
Unified Carrier Registration (UCR) Update August 24, 2006.
State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement - What Now? - Why Now? - How? Now? David Longanecker, WICHE President Jere Mock, Vice President of Programs &
Surviving the State Authorization Roller Coaster Ride DETC Fall Workshop October 16, 2012.
Tracking SARA: An Update on the State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement November 14, 2012.
SARA: New Jersey Update. What is SARA  A uniform method across the nation which establishes a state-level reciprocity process to serve all interested.
Chesapeake Bay Program Goal Development, Governance, and Alignment Carin Bisland, GIT6 Vice Chair.
Chesapeake Bay Program Goal Development, Governance, and Alignment Carin Bisland, GIT6 Vice Chair.
Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards 77th Annual Congress Orlando, Florida Accreditation 101 & Panel Discussion Saturday May 3, :00 – 10:00.
Past, Present & Likely Future of State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (SARA) March 2, 2015.
Using Accreditation to Support Your Goals Fall Institute for Academic Deans and Department Chair Charleston, SC October 18, 2004.
Alabama GIS Executive Council November 17, Alabama GIS Executive Council Governor Bob Riley signs Executive Order No. 38 on November 27 th, 2007.
Opportunities for RAC Participation. Three Part discussion General presentation; Example of oil and gas decision making; and Panel Discussion of RAC involvement.
Session #34 Program Integrity: Institutional and Program Eligibility: State Authorization Sophia McArdle Fred Sellers U.S. Department of Education Note:
Emerging Policy Issues in Distance Learning SHEEO Annual Meeting July, Seattle, Washington Marshall A. Hill Executive Director, Nebraska Coordinating.
Today’s Speakers The State of State Authorization: Regulations and Reciprocity OCICU Conference March 2015.
Allen Grundy, M. Ed, Consultant Veterans Educational Resource Centers in Higher Education (CVERCHE) “MILITARY FRIENDLY” OR IS IT?
Southern Regional Education Board SREB State Authorization Regional Reciprocity (S-SARA) Regional Forum January 21, 2014.
Federal Emphasis on Accountability in Higher Education and Regional Accreditation Processes Carla D. Sanderson Commissioner, Southern Association of Colleges.
Independent School Process Agency of Education State Board of Education Presentation March 25, 2014.
THE ROLE OF EDUCATIONAL ACCREDITATION IN LICENSURE MOBILITY Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards Atlanta, Georgia May 2, 2008 Joseph Brimhall, D.C.
Who is SARA? And should I know her?. SARA  S tate A uthorization R eciprocity A greement  Establishes comparable national standards for interstate offering.
July 18, 2014 Jenny Parks, Director, M-SARA, Midwestern Higher Education Compact (MHEC) 1.
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act March 23, 2010.
Establishing SARA, the State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement WCET State Authorization Network November 13-14, 2013 Denver, CO.
SACS-CASI Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement FAMU DRS – QAR Quality Assurance Review April 27-28,
“SARA:” State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement A Process To Make State Authorization More Uniform, Effective and Efficient April, 2012.
“State Authorization” of Distance Education Challenges/Barriers/Opportunities Shellie L. Haut September 16, 2015.
DGS Recommendations to the Governor’s Task Force on Contracting & Procurement Review Report Overview August 12, 2002.
October 14, 2015 Michigan Workshop on the Midwestern State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (M-SARA) University Club, Michigan State University 1.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
October 14, 2015 Michigan Workshop on the Midwestern State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (M-SARA) University Club, Michigan State University 1.
Planning for School Implementation. Choice Programs Requires both district and school level coordination roles The district office establishes guidelines,
Distance Learning and Accreditation Heather G. Hartman, Ph.D. Brenau University Online Studies and SACS Liaison.
Prepared by Commission staff for presentation purposes only. These slides should not be considered an official summary of the order or an official Commission.
SREB Educational Technology Cooperative 2015 Spring Workshop Series State Authorization Update Wanda Barker – Director Educational Technology Cooperative.
An Overview of State Authorization and SARA An MCCA Webinar Wednesday, November 4, 2015.
PHDSC Privacy, Security, and Data Sharing Committee Letter to Governors.
Virginia Office of Public-Private Partnerships (VAP3) Adopted Public-Private Transportation Act (PPTA) enabling legislation in 1995 Public-Private Education.
Presentation to the House Education Committee January 13, 2011.
Southern Regional Education Board Council of Alabama University Chief Academic Officers Meeting February 19, 2014.
ICAJ/PAB - Improving Compliance with International Standards on Auditing Planning an audit of financial statements 19 July 2014.
CONNECT Events and Groups LEARN News and Views ADVANCE Policies and Practices New Federal Regulations on State Authorization of Distance Education Distance.
The Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system is an Equal Opportunity employer and educator. Todd Digby Minnesota State Colleges & Universities.
SECRRA and SARA Updates March 4,
Department of Energy Energy Agency Reorganization Plan Little Hoover Commission Hearing on Governor Schwarzenegger’s Plan to Establish a Department of.
North Carolina Community College System 2016 DL Directors Institute March 14, 2016.
Pennsylvania SARA Meeting
SARA Gets You Out of Jeopardy!
Supervision of Insurance Market Conduct in Canada
Private Institution Regulation by SCHEV
SARA State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement for Distance Education
State Authorization and SARA: How Did We Get Here?
DE Coordinator’s November 2012 Telephone Meeting
MoKanSAN Summit Kansas City, Missouri January 8, 2018.
Legal Issues in Higher Education December 12, 2013 Russ Poulin
Florida Association of Veteran Education Specialists (FAVES 2016)
Mary Larson Director, Student Access Programs and Services
MAC Input on Section 4.9 Review
Welcome to the NC-SARA Webcast SARA Notification Requirements
Presentation transcript:

Presenters Marshall A. Hill Executive Director National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements 3005 Center Green Drive, Suite 130 Boulder, Colorado Alan Contreras SARA Coordinator National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements 3005 Center Green Drive, Suite 130 Boulder, CO

Acknowledgement Funding for national and regional implementation provided by Lumina Foundation. 3

What’s the problem? States and territories regulate higher education within their borders, with varying requirements for out-of-state institutions that want to do business in the state. Cross-state online education offered by colleges and universities is expanding dramatically. At present there is no alternative to each institution separately pursuing any needed approvals (state authorization) in each state and territory where it enrolls students. Consequently, thousands of institutions are required to contact and work through as many as 54 states and territories, and, sometimes, with multiple regulatory agencies in those states. That process is inefficient, costly, and not effective in supporting access to high quality distance education throughout the country. 4

The Current Process (1 OF 2) Institutions seek authorization from every state or territory where they hope to serve students. **Sample state with 4 institutions of higher education, with all offering on-line degrees in other states** 4 institutions (>4000 in the US) x 54 states/territories x number of programs (sometimes) x number of students (sometimes) x amount of revenue (sometimes) MANY COSTS TO INSTITUTIONS AND STUDENTS 5

The Current Process (2 OF 2) Institutions seek authorization from every state or territory where they hope to serve students. Current Costs:  At least approximately 228 authorizations  Initial and renewal fees; applications and fees change in some states even when only minor changes occur at the institutional or program level  Person-hours to obtain and maintain authorizations  Turning away students where institutions are not able to authorize (particular impact on small programs and schools)  Lack of data on participation in programs and numbers of students  Confusion over jurisdiction to resolve complaints  Much noncompliance, under-compliance, and the associated risks (please see research by WCET/Sloan Consortium)(please see research by WCET/Sloan Consortium) 6

Goals SARA establishes a state-level reciprocity process that will support the nation in its efforts to increase the educational attainment of its people by making state authorization: more efficient, effective, and uniform in regard to necessary and reasonable standards of practice that could span states; more effective in dealing with quality and integrity issues that have arisen in some online/distance education offerings; and less costly for states and institutions and, thereby, the students they serve. 7

The Solution A nation-wide system of reciprocity administered by the four existing regional compacts 8

National Council for SARA (NC-SARA) Purposes – coordination, appeals, financing, data. 21 members – regional compact presidents, accreditors, regulators, state government, SHEEO, various higher education sectors. First meeting November 1, Consideration of by-laws. Financial overview for SARA. Establish fees for institutional participation in SARA. –$2,000/year for institutions with fewer than 2,500 FTE students –$4,000/year for institutions between 2,500-9,999 FTE students –$6,000/year for institutions with 10,000 or more FTE students Review and endorse regional SARA documents. Regional status reports. 9

Essential principles of SARA Voluntary for states and institutions. Acknowledges the traditional roles within higher education’s “accountability triad”: federal government, states, and accrediting bodies recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. Lays out a framework for state-level reciprocity, including a governance structure, implementation by the four regional higher education compacts (MHEC, NEBHE, SREB, WICHE), a National Council for SARA to ensure comprehensive national coverage, and a financial plan to support operations. Requires states to approve their in-state institutions for SARA participation (based upon institutional accreditation and financial stability) and resolve student complaints. SARA states agree to impose no additional (non-SARA) requirements on institutions from other SARA states. 10

Essential principles of SARA Open to degree-granting postsecondary institutions from all sectors: public colleges and universities; independent institutions, both non-profit and for-profit. Sets forth a reasonable, uniform set of triggers of “physical presence”. Preserves state approval and oversight of on-the-ground campuses. Shifts principal oversight responsibilities from the state in which the distance education is being received to the “home state” of the institution offering the instruction. (Host state can also work to resolve problems.) Initial funding from Lumina Foundation, eventual reliance on institutional fees paid to the National Council for SARA. 11

The SARA Process (1 OF 2) Institutions seek approval from their home SARA-member state. The home state SARA agency then works with those institutions in regard to the export of on-line education across state lines to students in SARA host states. 4 institutions (>4000 in the US) x 1 state/territory x number of programs (sometimes) x number of students (sometimes) x amount of revenue (sometimes) 12

The SARA Process (2 OF 2) Institutions seek approval from their home SARA-member state. The home state SARA agency then works with those institutions in regard to the export of on-line education across state lines to students in SARA host states. Reduced Costs: Institution pays one fee per year to NC-SARA Institutions pays one or no fee to their home state SARA agency Regulators switch from regulating imports to responding to problems caused by exports Consistent criteria for SARA participation Fewer students get turned away Consistent (and eventually centralized) data collection and sharing Consistent definition and clear path of complaint resolution More consistent compliance 13

Issues SARA does not address Professional licensing board approval for programs leading to licensing: nursing, teacher education, psychology, etc. Online offerings provided free and beyond the scope of current regulation of the degree programs of accredited academic institutions (free, non-credit MOOCs, etc.). Non-credit instruction. 14

Who has been involved in crafting SARA? SARA was developed with input from: A broad advisory committee. Regional higher education compacts (MHEC, NEBHE, SREB, WICHE). State regulators. State Higher Education Executive Officers. Accrediting organizations. U.S. Department of Education. Institutional leaders representing all sectors of higher education. 15

The evolution of SARA Lumina Foundation provided funding to the Presidents’ Forum, working with the Council of State Governments (CSG), to develop a Model State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (SARA) that states could adopt to acknowledge other states’ work and decisions in regard to institutional authorization. Building upon the work of the Presidents’ Forum and CSG, the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) advanced “W-SARA” in collaboration with the regional higher education compacts (SREB, MHEC, NEBHE). Combining all prior efforts and input from all stakeholders, the Commission on the Regulation of Postsecondary Distance Education, founded by SHEEO and APLU, and chaired by former Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley, issued its report: “Advancing Access through Regulatory Reform: Findings, Principles, and Recommendations for the State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (SARA).” Funding for national and regional implementation provided by Lumina Foundation. 16

What do states need to do? Determine if the state wants to participate. Make any needed changes to statutes or rules. Identify agency(ies) to solicit and approve participation of in-state institutions and resolve complaints. Identify lead agency (if needed). Adopt in-state funding model (if needed). Develop and submit SARA application to the state’s regional compact. 17

Benefits to states Expands educational offerings to state residents. Allows SARA states to focus on their home-state institutions, rather than on institutions from many other states. Maintains state regulation of on-the-ground instruction offered by out-of-state institutions. Other SARA states will help resolve complaints. (SARA states commit to resolving complaints stemming from distance education offered by their institutions.) Reduces costs for institutions, lessening this particular need to raise fees and thereby supporting affordability. No cost to states. 18

Benefits to institutions Enables more efficient provision of distance education to a broader market. Reduces number of other-state regulations to continually monitor and track. Reduces number of applications and individual state requirements. Reduces costs. Applications, surety bonds, agent licenses, etc. Staff (payroll and time). Reduced costs = potentially lower fees for students. 19

Benefits to students Expands access to educational offerings. Should lead to better resolution of complaints from students in SARA states. Reduces a rapidly growing institutional cost that is in one way or another passed along to students. Should enhance overall quality of distance education 20

21 Latest News How many states are seriously considering SARA? Data, consumer protection, catastrophic events Work plan moving forward Meetings FAQs

Learn more about SARA NC-SARA website: Regional Education Compacts: MHEC – NEBHE – SREB – WICHE – 22

Learn more about SARA Marshall A. Hill, Ph.D. Executive Director National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements 3005 Center Green Drive, Suite 130 Boulder, CO l Kiley Danchise-Curtis Program Coordinator, N-SARA New England Board of Higher Education (NEBHE) 45 Temple Place Boston, MA l Rhonda M. Epper, Ph.D. Director, W-SARA Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) 3005 Center Green Drive, Suite 130 Boulder, CO l Mary A. Larson, M.Ed. Director, S-SARA Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) th Street N.W. Atlanta, GA ext. 219 l Jennifer L. Parks, M.A. Director, M-SARA Midwestern Higher Education Compact (MHEC) 105 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 450 Minneapolis, MN l 23