[Code of Federal Regulations] [Title 34, Volume 3] [Revised as of July 1, 2007] From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access [CITE: 34CFR603.24] [Page 215-217] TITLE 34--EDUCATION CHAPTER VI--OFFICE OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PART 603_SECRETARY'S RECOGNITION PROCEDURES FOR STATE AGENCIES--Table of Subpart B_Criteria for State Agencies Sec. 603.24 Criteria for State agencies. The following are the criteria which the Secretary will utilize in designating a State agency as a reliable authority to assess the quality of public postsecondary vocational education in its respective State. (a) Functional aspects. The functional aspects of the State agency must be shown by: (1) Its scope of operations. The agency: (i) Is statewide in the scope of its operations and is legally authorized to approve public postsecondary vocational institutions or programs; (ii) Clearly sets forth the scope of its objectives and activities, both as to kinds and levels of public postsecondary vocational institutions or programs covered, and the kinds of operations performed; (iii) Delineates the process by which it differentiates among and approves programs of varying levels. (2) Its organization. The State agency: (i) Employs qualified personnel and uses sound procedures to carry out its operations in a timely and effective manner; (ii) Receives adequate and timely financial support, as shown by its appropriations, to carry out its operations; (iii) Selects competent and knowledgeable persons, qualified by experience and training, and selects such persons in accordance with nondiscriminatory practices, (A) to participate on visiting teams, (B) to engage in consultative services for the evaluation and approval process, and (C) to serve on decision-making bodies. (3) Its procedures. The State agency: (i) Maintains clear definitions of approval status and has developed written procedures for granting, reaffirming, revoking, denying, and reinstating approval status; (ii) Requires, as an integral part of the approval and reapproval process, institutional or program self-analysis and onsite reviews by visiting teams, [[Page 216]] and provides written and consultative guidance to institutions or programs and visiting teams. (A) Self-analysis shall be a qualitative assessment of the strengths and limitations of the instructional program, including the achievement of institutional or program objectives, and should involve a representative portion of the institution's administrative staff, teaching faculty, students, governing body, and other appropriate constituencies. (B) The visiting team, which includes qualified examiners other than agency staff, reviews instructional content, methods and resources, administrative management, student services, and facilities. It prepares written reports and recommendations for use by the State agency. (iii) Reevaluates at reasonable and regularly scheduled intervals institutions or programs which it has approved. (b) Responsibility and reliability. The responsibility and reliability of the State agency will be demonstrated by: (1) Its responsiveness to the public interest. The State agency: (i) Has an advisory body which provides for representation from public employment services and employers, employees, postsecondary vocational educators, students, and the general public, including minority groups. Among its functions, this structure provides counsel to the State agency relating to the development of standards, operating procedures and policy, and interprets the educational needs and manpower projections of the State's public postsecondary vocational education system; (ii) Demonstrates that the advisory body makes a real and meaningful contribution to the approval process; (iii) Provides advance public notice of proposed or revised standards or regulations through its regular channels of communications, supplemented, if necessary, with direct communication to inform interested members of the affected community. In addition, it provides such persons the opportunity to comment on the standards or regulations prior to their adoption; (iv) Secures sufficient qualitative information regarding the applicant institution or program to enable the institution or program to demonstrate that it has an ongoing program of evaluation of outputs consistent with its educational goals; (v) Encourages experimental and innovative programs to the extent that these are conceived and implemented in a manner which ensures the quality and integrity of the institution or program; (vi) Demonstrates that it approves only those institutions or programs which meet its published standards; that its standards, policies, and procedures are fairly applied; and that its evaluations are conducted and decisions are rendered under conditions that assure an impartial and objective judgment; (vii) Regularly reviews its standards, policies and procedures in order that the evaluative process shall support constructive analysis, emphasize factors of critical importance, and reflect the educational and training needs of the student; (viii) Performs no function that would be inconsistent with the formation of an independent judgment of the quality of an educational institution or program; (ix) Has written procedures for the review of complaints pertaining to institutional or program quality as these relate to the agency's standards, and demonstrates that such procedures are adequate to provide timely treatment of such complaints in a manner fair and equitable to the complainant and to the institution or program; (x) Annually makes available to the public (A) its policies for approval, (B) reports of its operations, and (C) list of institutions or programs which it has approved; (xi) Requires each approved school or program to report on changes instituted to determine continued compliance with standards or regulations; (xii) Confers regularly with counterpart agencies that have similar responsibilities in other and neighboring States about methods and techniques that may be used to meet those responsibilities. (2) Its assurances that due process is accorded to institutions or programs seeking approval. The State agency: [[Page 217]] (i) Provides for adequate discussion during the on-site visit between the visiting team and the faculty, administrative staff, students, and other appropriate persons; (ii) Furnishes as a result of the evaluation visit, a written report to the institution or program commenting on areas of strength, areas needing improvement, and, when appropriate, suggesting means of improvement and including specific areas, if any, where the institution or program may not be in compliance with the agency's standards; (iii) Provides the chief executive officer of the institution or program with opportunity to comment upon the written report and to file supplemental materials pertinent to the facts and conclusions in the written report of the visiting team before the agency takes action on the report; (iv) Provides the chief executive officer of the institution with a specific statement of reasons for any adverse action, and notice of the right to appeal such action before an appeal body designated for that purpose; (v) Publishes rules of procedure regarding appeals; (vi) Continues the approval status of the institution or program pending disposition of an appeal; (vii) Furnishes the chief executive officer of the institution or program with a written decision of the appeal body, including a statement of its reasons therefor. (c) Capacity to foster ethical practices. The State agency must demonstrate its capability and willingness to foster ethical practices by showing that it: (i) Promotes a well-defined set of ethical standards governing institutional or programmatic practices, including recruitment, advertising, transcripts, fair and equitable student tuition refunds, and student placement services; (ii) Maintains appropriate review in relation to the ethical practices of each approved institution or program. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1087-1(b))