3333-1-08 Standards and processes for issuance of certificate of authorization under section 1713.03, Ohio Revised Code.

 

 

 

Rule Summary and Fiscal Analysis (Part A)

 

Ohio Board of Regents

Agency Name

 

Michelle Chavanne

Division                                                                  Contact

 

30 E. Broad Street, 36th Floor Columbus OH 43215-0000

[phone]

Agency Mailing Address (Plus Zip)                                       Phone                     Fax

3333-1-08

Rule Number

RESCISSION

TYPE of rule filing

Rule Title/Tag Line              Standards for issuance of certificates of authorization under section 1713.03, Ohio Revised Code.

RULE SUMMARY

1.  Is the rule being filed consistent with the requirements of the RC 119.032 review? Yes

2.  Are you proposing this rule as a result of recent legislation? No

3.  Statute prescribing the procedure in accordance with the agency is required to adopt the rule: 119.03

4.  Statute(s) authorizing agency to adopt the rule: 1713.03

5.  Statute(s) the rule, as filed, amplifies or implements: 1713.03

6.  State the reason(s) for proposing (i.e., why are you filing,) this rule:

The rule had not been revised in many years and does not reflect current thinking (in Ohio and nationally) regarding appropriate standards and processes for the review of academic programs. Specifically, the review process was overly cumbersome for institutions in good standing with the state and other accreditors, and the standards were not reflective of recent changes in post-secondary education (e.g., online education, assessment of student learning, easier access to library materials).

7.  If the rule is an AMENDMENT, then summarize the changes and the content of the proposed rule; If the rule type is RESCISSION, NEW or NO CHANGE, then summarize the content of the rule:

Regionally or nationally accredited institutions operating in the state for more than 20 years will be able to offer new degree programs and open new locations with a more limited review process by the Ohio Board of Regents, as long as they are in good standing with their accreditors and the state.

To avoid duplicative review processes, whenever possible, reviews are completed in conjunction with the institution's regional, national or institutional specialized accreditor.

Standards are broadly outlined in the rule - specifics regarding standards and processes are outlined in a manual, "Standards and Processes for Academic Program Approval."

8.  If the rule incorporates a text or other material by reference and the agency claims the incorporation by reference is exempt from compliance with sections

121.71 to 121.74 of the Revised Code because the text or other material is generally available to persons who reasonably can be expected to be affected by the rule, provide an explanation of how the text or other material is generally available to those persons:

This response left blank because filer specified online that the rule does not incorporate a text or other material by reference.

9.  If the rule incorporates a text or other material by reference, and it was infeasible for the agency to file the text or other material electronically, provide an explanation of why filing the text or other material electronically was infeasible:

This response left blank because filer specified online that the rule does not incorporate a text or other material by reference.

10.  If the rule is being rescinded and incorporates a text or other material by reference, and it was infeasible for the agency to file the text or other material, provide an explanation of why filing the text or other material was infeasible:

This response left blank because filer specified online that the rule does not incorporate a text or other materials by reference.

11.  If revising or refiling this rule, identify changes made from the previously

filed version of this rule; if none, please state so:

None

12. 119.032 Rule Review Date: 3/10/2011

(If the rule is not exempt and you answered NO to question No. 1, provide the scheduled review date. If you answered YES to No. 1, the review date for this rule is the filing date.)

NOTE: If the rule is not exempt at the time of final filing, two dates are required: the current review date plus a date not to exceed 5 years from the effective date for Amended rules or a date not to exceed 5 years from the review date for No Change rules.

FISCAL ANALYSIS

13.  Estimate the total amount by which this proposed rule would increase / decrease either revenues / expenditures for the agency during the current biennium (in dollars): Explain the net impact of the proposed changes to the budget of your agency/department.

This will have no impact on revenues or expenditures. 0.00

The proposed rule would both decrease revenues and decrease expenditures - so the overall effect is negligible. The review of private in the state is done on a fee basis. the institutions pay a program review fee to support staff efforts and pay for the fees and expenses of the consultants who are hired to perform the evaluations. If reviews are not needed, no fees will be collected and consultants will not be hired. Overall the change will reduce the costs to the private institutions in the state that have been operating for more than 20 years and are in good standing with their regional/national and specialized accreditors. Costs to new institutions (of those who are experiencing difficulties with their regional, national or specialized accreditor) will remain unchanged.

14.  Identify the appropriation (by line item etc.) that authorizes each expenditure necessitated by the proposed rule:

Line item 235-614

15.  Provide a summary of the estimated cost of compliance with the rule to all directly affected persons. When appropriate, please include the source for your information/estimated costs, e.g. industry, CFR, internal/agency:

The cost of compliance will go down for institutions that have been operating in the state for more than 20 years and are in good standing with their regional/national and specialized accreditors. There will be no change in the cost of compliance for institutions that are new to the state or have had negative review outcomes from their regional/national or specialized accreditors.

16.  Does this rule have a fiscal effect on school districts, counties, townships, or municipal corporations? No

17.  Does this rule deal with environmental protection or contain a component dealing with environmental protection as defined in R. C. 121.39? No