2. Presenters Marshall A. Hill Executive Director National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements 3005 Center Green Drive, Suite 130 Boulder, Colorado 80301 303.541.0283 mhill@nc-sara.org www.nc-sara.org Alan Contreras SARA Coordinator National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements 3005 Center Green Drive, Suite 130 Boulder, CO 80301 303.541.0275 acontreras@nc-sara.org www.nc-sara.org 2

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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

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

9. 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, 2013. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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. 21 Latest News How many states are seriously considering SARA? Data, consumer protection, catastrophic events Work plan moving forward Meetings FAQs

22. Learn more about SARA NC-SARA website: www.nc-sara.orgwww.nc-sara.org Regional Education Compacts: MHEC – www.mhec.orgwww.mhec.org NEBHE – www.nebhe.orgwww.nebhe.org SREB – www.sreb.orgwww.sreb.org WICHE – www.wiche.eduwww.wiche.edu 22

23. 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 80301 303.541.0283 l mhill@nc-sara.org www.nc-sara.org Kiley Danchise-Curtis Program Coordinator, N-SARA New England Board of Higher Education (NEBHE) 45 Temple Place Boston, MA 02111 617.533.9503 l kdanchise-curtis@nebhe.org www.nebhe.org Rhonda M. Epper, Ph.D. Director, W-SARA Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) 3005 Center Green Drive, Suite 130 Boulder, CO 80301 303.541.0277 l repper@wiche.edu www.wiche.edu Mary A. Larson, M.Ed. Director, S-SARA Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) 592 10th Street N.W. Atlanta, GA 30318-5776 404.875.9211 ext. 219 l mary.larson@sreb.org www.sreb.org Jennifer L. Parks, M.A. Director, M-SARA Midwestern Higher Education Compact (MHEC) 105 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 450 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.677.2770 l jennyp@MHEC.org www.mhec.org 23