Meeting Minutes

The meeting started at 10:45am by Vincent Ferrara. The minutes were reviewed from the March 1, 2001 meeting.

Denis Peterson, Deputy Commissioner of the NYS Department of Labor, was welcomed to the meeting.

The charge of the Legislative Task Force Sub-Committee was discussed. It is our mandate to bring information to the Advisory Council (AC). How do we get past the circle of "go back to the sub-meeting" when things are brought before the AC? Do we continue with current issues or move on to another item? The decision was made to continue.

A clock hour/credit hour conversion proposal written by Scott Katcher was distributed to the attendees. This proposal was originally addressed to Jerome McAvoy, dated April 10, 2001. The paper addressed definitions of key words such as "course", "curriculum", and "certificate" where there are differences between Part 50.1 applicable to degree granting institutions and Part 126.1 applicable to non-degree granting institutions. Mr. Katcher stated that, "These terms contained in both Part 50.1 and Part 126.1 of the Regulations of the Commissioner clearly demonstrate that the same and similar terms can be defined differently by consistently as they relate to both degree granting institutions and non degree granting institutions…" Referring to this comparison, Mr. Katcher continues with, "…the use of and defining the term "credit" in Part 50.1 does not preclude the term from being used in another part of the Commissioner’s Regulations, specifically in Part 126.1. Nor should the absence of the term "credit" or "credit hour" in the definitions contained in Part 126.1 preclude the regulations from being amended to include this term."

After reviewing the proposal, it was suggested by Denis Peterson that this issue be brought before the Governor’s Office of Regulatory Reform (GORR).

The sub-committee agreed on the following action items:

• Review the subject of credit hours with GORR
• Identify Scott Katcher’s role in the committee
• Work on a campaign to increase support from other schools within the licensed sector
• Align with businesses within the industry for a unified approach
• Update the Advisory Council at the next AC meeting

The expansion of TAP funding eligibility was addressed. Denis suggested that schools should seek other options for additional funding for their students. He suggested Dept. of Labor grant programs for the underprivileged (i.e., high school drop outs, returning mothers).

Private businesses that are not licensed are on the WIA listing as eligible providers. As licensed schools, we need to follow the 120-day curriculum process, while the unlicensed schools do not. Many times, a Request for Proposals (RFP) requests a customized program and there is not enough time to submit an approved program under the current process.

If a curriculum is specifically designed by an agency, why does it need to be BPSS approved? The proposal was made for a curriculum review process similar to the Nationally Recognized Vendor (NRV) process whereby the agency would "certify" the curriculum prior to BPSS review. Having the seal of approval from the agency could put the curriculum application on a shortened approval process so that the RFP could be fulfilled in a timely manner.

The committee also proposes that a letter be drafted for the Advisory Council’s signature regarding state funds being awarded only to state-compliant schools. Terry Zaleski will draft this letter.

The next meeting of the Legislative Task Force Sub-Committee is scheduled for:

The meeting concluded at 1:00pm.