National Site Team Chair Continuing

Education

April 26, 2012

Webinar

Participants today:

National Site Team Chairs Accreditation Commission Members Welcome to our guests, the Regional Directors

National Site Team Chair Training Update

This training will:

Review the success of the National Site Team Chairs

Review the Site Team Process Review expectations Clarify misconceptions Highlight mutual learning from the process Review common issues Provide a forum for input

National Site Team Chair Training

The National Site Team Chair program has:

Improved satisfaction of site visits Reduced numbers of notations Resulted in fewer called reviews after ten-year

reviews Expedited National Reviewer process Increased collaboration and collegiality

Success of the National Site Team Chairs

The accreditation site visit moves:

Away from “us/them” view

Toward mutuality to educate students and improve the quality of ACPE CPE

Success of the National Site Team Chairs

The site visit:

Provides collaboration and collegiality Captures unique, creative story and work of the

Center Supports the work with students and institution Undergirds Center importance for the institution Affirms Center’s compliance with ACPE Standards Notes areas of Center’s non-compliance with ACPE

Standards Advocates continued success

The Imperatives for the Site Visit

Site team is:

◦ Facilitator—of context and Center-centricity

◦ Supporter—of the Center and of ACPE

◦ Encourager—of the Supervisor and the process

◦ Challenger—of integration of theory and practice

◦ Reviewer—of compliance and uniqueness

◦ Advocate—of continued success

Review of Site Visit Expectations

Competent Supervisors: Serve administrators and students. Serve the profession and the program. Listen to students’ learning needs, met and unmet. Seek site team feedback to improve and make changes. Celebrate good work.

Competent Site Teams: Review Center as to how it meets ACPE 300 Standards. Look for system dynamics and themes. Recognize parallels and give feedback. See learning needs of students & Supervisor, met and

unmet. Listen more than they speak. Have courage, with humility, to say what they see.

When centers resist mutuality, site teams will:

Rely on fundamentals of meeting Standards Return incomplete material for further work Access checklists Resist reactivity Recommend notations

Happily, the Commission has not experienced any centers resisting mutuality since the inception of the program.

Review of Site Visit Expectations

Pre-Visit

Responsible to Center, Accreditation Commission Educates potential regional site team visitors Consults with center supervisor prior to site visit Consults with National Site Team Chair

regarding suitability of material, if necessary Serves as liaison between National Site Team

Chair and Center Supervisor

The Role of the Regional Accreditation Committee

Chair

During the Visit

Can serve as support for regional site team visitors

Consults with National Site Team Chair if desired

The Role of the Regional Accreditation Committee

Chair

After the Visit

Receives copies of all reports from National Site Team Chair

Reports readiness of Center to the Commission Chair for inclusion on consent or non-consent agenda

Communicates with regional leaders regarding centers

The Role of the Regional Accreditation Committee

Chair

Pre-Visit

Responsible to the Accreditation Commission Chair Avoids conflicts of interest Leads the Site Team and its process Determines suitability of material Forms site teams with Regional Accreditation Chair Educates Site Team members Creates site visit agenda with Center Supervisor Negotiates arrangements for visit Reviews Center material with Site Team

The Role of the National Site Team Chair

During the Visit Meets with Site Team prior to visit◦ By conference calls pre-visit◦ On site on the first day of the site visit

Educates Site Team members as necessary Manages Site Team members’ accountability Delegates tasks appropriately Assures review is complete Makes initial report to Center at close of visit Arrives in time and stays throughout the visit

The Role of the National Site Team Chair

After the Visit—Written Reports Streamlines writing into cogent, clear reports Prepares Site Visit Report—Part I within 14 days Receives Center response within 30 days after

Center receives Site Visit Report—Part I Prepares Site Visit Report—Part II for delivery to

Center and Commission Chair ◦ Site Team notes clear descriptions of areas of non-compliance◦ National Reviewer specifies notations and requirements

Sends material to National Reviewer as assigned by Commission Chair or designee.

The Role of the National Site Team Chair

After the Visit

Delegates tasks appropriately Ensures that all deadlines are met Provides copies of all reports to Regional

Accreditation Chair, Commission chair Assures that: ◦ Feedback is secured from Center and Site Team◦ Feedback forms are completed◦ Forms are provided to Accreditation Commission Chair

The Role of the National Site Team Chair

To the Commission Chair

Advises that the Center is ready for Commission review

Forwards Center documents to assigned National Reviewer

Manages Site Team evaluation of Site Team Chair Ensures Center evaluation of Site Team Chair is

received by Commission Requests payment for site visit

The Role of the National Site Team Chair

The National Reviewer:

Receives all materials and reports Consults with center supervisor and National

Site Team Chair as desired Reviews areas of non-compliance (when present) Reviews areas for commendation (when present) Makes recommendations to the Commission

The Role of the Commission National Reviewer

Essentials for the Site Team Chairs:

Communicate with Regional Accreditation Chair, Center Supervisor(s), and Site Team membersRefuse inadequate materialOrient Site Team members to the Site VisitOrganize the visit and reportingDelegate tasks appropriatelyWrite professionally and specifically in all reportsMeet report deadlines (14/30/14)

Reaffirming Basics for National Site Team Chairs

Essentials for Regional Site Team Members:

Write professionallyArrive on time for orientation Respond in a timely way to requests of the ChairWork collaboratively with the Site TeamMeet report deadlines

Reaffirming Basics for Regional Site Team Members

Site Team and Commission Chairs have limited authority.

Site Visit is not a teaching time for administration. Site Visit scheduling is not meant to facilitate vacations

for site team visitors. Site Teams describe areas of noncompliance. Timelines are critical and cannot be changed. Collaboration is expected within the Site Team. National Reviewer determines recommendations. National Reviewers may speak with Center Supervisor(s)

and may add recommendations for notations or commendations without consulting the Site Team Chair.

Accreditation Commission makes final decisions.

Clarifications from Feedback

Site Visit Reports provide clear documentation of:

Site Team training and preparation Site team’s on-site compliance verification process Center meeting or not meeting ACPE Standards 300s◦ Site team’s assessment of Center’s meeting Standards, if

applicable◦ Description of recommendation(s) for notation(s)◦ Final recommendations and specific notations are purview of

National Reviewers Current reports do not meet USDOE requirements

and further instructions about improvements will be forthcoming.

Support for USDOE Accreditation

What is the process for the National Site Team Chair to determine if material is inadequate?

Review material as soon as it arrives. If more than 5-7 areas are out of compliance (need more than

minor attention), material may need to be returned. Consult with Regional Accreditation Chair for agreement. Return material as quickly as possible. Center supervisor is responsible to consult with Regional

Accreditation Chair about material and rescheduling site visit.

Common Challenges

How early can the National Site Team Chair contact the Center?

First contact at 45-60 days prior to the visit in order for roles to be observed (regional accreditation chair is consultant; national site team chair is assessor).

Regional Accreditation Chair is liaison and consultant.

Refer supervisors to Regional Accreditation Chair prior to this timeframe.

Communicate in writing (e-mail is preferable). Copy the Regional Accreditation Chair on all

communication.

Common Challenges

How can the site team best write the reports to assist the Center and the National Reviewer?

Include specific documentation. Always include the following language (with specific

center information) in the Site Visit Report—Part II:◦ “Grant accreditation for programs of CPE (Level I/Level II) [and

Supervisory CPE] with/without recommendation(s) of notation(s).”

◦ Note if center is institutional, freestanding, or system. Include specific language for recommended notations. Exclude expectations for Center response (National

Reviewer describes these expectations).

Common Challenges

How critical are report deadlines (14/30/14)?

Site Teams and Centers must meet timeframes. Neither National Site Team Chair nor Commission

Chair has authority to change due dates. Include dates and circumstances when reports are

late. Take caution in scheduling site visits after October

15 so as not to conflict with holidays. Commission may assign a notation for Standard

300.1 for late reporting.

Common Challenges

To whom and when do National Site Team Chairs send reports?

Upon completion of Site Visit Report—Part II, National Site Teams Chairs notify the Commission Chair immediately.

The Commission Chair/designee assigns National Reviewer. National Site Team Chair sends all material as soon as

possible after assignment to the National Reviewer. Commission meeting dates will be communicated to National

Site Team Chairs. Dates of ACPE Leadership Meetings are on-line. National Reviewers must have all material in hand at least 30 days prior to the Commission meeting.

Common Challenges

How do National Reviewers manage notation/commendation recommendations?

The National Reviewer receives site team material with recommendations.

The National Reviewer peruses material and writes specific recommendations for the Commission.

The National Reviewer may contact the Center Supervisor if the matter can be resolved easily.

The Center is placed on the “non-consent agenda” to discuss any recommendations.

Recommendations are presented to the Commission. The Commission decides on notations, commendations, or

further recommendations to the Center.

Common Challenges

300.1 All ACPE Centers shall maintain compliance with the ACPE Standards, reports, procedures and fees as detailed in the ACPE Accreditation Manual.

Centers are responsible to: Submit student units reports to ACPE within 45 days of the

end of each unit Meet deadlines for all accreditation reviews:

◦ Timelines within a ten year review (14/30/14)◦ Annual Reports ◦ Five Year Reviews◦ Called Reviews

Common Notations—Timely Reporting

Common Notations—Agreements

304.4 a procedure for maintaining student records for ten years, which addresses confidentiality, access, content, and custody of student

records should the center be without a supervisor and/or accreditation. (See

Guidefor Student Records, Appendix 7 B, ACPE Accreditation Manual.)

Accredited Centers are responsible to maintain student files appropriately. Centers must keep a facesheet for all students. This is not optional. Please refer to Appendix 7B, page 2, bullet 2.

Common Notations—Records

304.7 a policy for ethical conduct of students andprogram staff consistent with the

ACPE Code of Ethics.

Accredited Centers are responsible to maintain provide a policy that ensures that its students know requirements for ethical behavior and practice. CPE Students may not be held to the ACPE Code of Ethics, unless they are members of ACPE, Inc.

Common Notations—Ethics

308.8.1 supervisor’s evaluation will be available to the student within 45 calendar days of thecompletion of the unit. To extend this deadline in rare, unusual circumstances,

the supervisor may negotiate with the student and receive approval from the regional accreditation chair to extend this deadline.The supervisor’s evaluation will document this process, and such extensions must be reported on the next annual report.

This remains an issue for some centers. Thanks for identifying these areas of concern.

Common Notations—Evaluations

What other issues, questions, or concerns do you have?

“Could you say more about agreements?”◦The best way to understand the need for agreements

is to recognize that the only accredited entity is the center itself. Whenever students are placed or educated outside that center, an agreement (satellite program, clinical placement, educational placement, or component site) must be in place to provide the accreditation structure needed to do units of CPE. Agreements also provide protection for the Center and the students. These agreements must be available for review.

Questions from Participants

What other issues, questions, or concerns do you have?

“What is the USDOE looking for in reports?”◦For all its accredited entities, the USDOE has

stepped up expectations for site visit reports. The reports should be very specific about descriptions of work and assessments. Centers should complete Appendix 5, Parts I and II, and include it with their self-study as demonstration of meeting Standards 300s. More details will be coming soon in regard to these expectations.

Questions from Participants

If you have other questions after reviewing this presentation, please contact the Chair of the Accreditation Commission.

Questions from Participants

Thank you for your service to ACPE, Inc.,

to our accredited centers, and to our colleagues.

Thank You!