Aug 16, 2022 Board Work Session

[00:00:01]

OKAY. IT IS 1001.

[1. Roll Call - Announcement of a Quorum]

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC FOLLOWS THE INSTRUCTION ON THE DALLAS COLLEGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES WEBSITE FOR REGISTERING TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC.

COMMENT PORTION WILL BE GIVEN 5 MINUTES TO SPEAK.

THIS WORK SESSION MEETING HAS BEEN BROADCAST OVER THE INTERNET.

AN AUDIO RECORDING AND TRANSCRIPT OF THIS MEETING ARE BEING MADE AND WILL BE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC ON THE BOARD'S WEBSITE AFTER THE MEETING AT A LATER DATE.

[2. Certification of Notice Posted for the Meeting]

THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANY CITIZENS DESIRING TO GET SUPPORT TODAY? SURE. NO, I'M SORRY.

ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

SO WE NOW WILL MOVE ON TO OUR FACILITATOR FOR HIS PRESENTATION, CHAPTER ONE.

[4.1. Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC): An Overview]

THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE FOR THIS VERY IMPORTANT TOPIC.

AND WE'RE LUCKY TO HAVE DR.

LARRY IRVIN, WHO SERVES AS THE CHIEF OF STAFF FROM THE SAC S.O.S.

TO BE WITH US TODAY.

SOME OF YOU WHO HAVE BEEN AROUND THIS TABLE FOR A WHILE HAVE BEEN THROUGH SIMILAR SESSIONS BEFORE, BUT IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY JUST TO KIND OF REMIND US OF THE IMPORTANCE OF COORDINATION AND OUR PROCESS AROUND THAT.

OBVIOUSLY, THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WE'VE HAD PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THAT BETWEEN OUR CONSOLIDATION AND THE SAC, ICAC REVIEW OF THAT AND ACCEPTANCE OF THAT, AND THEN ALSO OUR LEVEL CHANGE TO OFFER A FOUR YEAR DEGREE IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION.

SO SO WE HAVE SEEN OUR FRIENDS FROM ATLANTA QUITE A BIT THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.

AND AND SO WE APPRECIATE THAT AND APPRECIATE DR.

ERVIN BEING HERE TO BE OUR BE OUR EXPERT, SHARE WITH US AND PROVIDE A LITTLE CONTEXT IN DETAIL TO ALL THINGS ACCREDITATION.

AND I SHOULD ALSO SAY, DR.

ERVIN, AS HE'S BEEN IN THIS ROLE FOR ABOUT SEVEN YEARS WITH SACS, EEOC, BUT PRIOR TO THAT, HE SERVED AS THE PRESIDENT OF HOUSTON TOTEM COLLEGE IN AUSTIN.

SO IT WAS ALSO FAMILIAR WITH AND IN A PREVIOUS LIFE, PREVIOUS ROLE ALSO WAS PART OF AN INSTITUTION THAT HAD BEEN THROUGH A CONSOLIDATION.

SO HE'S SEEN CONSOLIDATION AND A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT LEVELS AND STAGES THROUGH THE YEARS.

SO SO APPRECIATE HIS PERSPECTIVE AND UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS AS WELL.

SO THAT. THANK YOU.

AND FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION TO TO TO BE HERE AND TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, BECAUSE OFTENTIMES THAT KIND OF GETS OVERLOOKED IN THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT YOU GIVE TO SOMETHING THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO OUR COMMUNITIES.

I WANT TO, FROM THIS VANTAGE POINT, SAY THANK YOU FOR THAT AND TO THANK CHANCELLOR LONDON FOR SAYING CALLING US FRIENDS, YOU KNOW, QUITE OFTEN WOULD NOT REGARD IT AS FRIENDS WHERE WE GO.

BUT ONE OF THE FIRST PARTS OF MY SPIEL WHEN I TALK WITH PEOPLE ON CAMPUSES IS TO TELL THEM THAT WE'RE NOT SACS.

SEE, YOU ARE ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY ARE NOT THINGS THAT THE STAFF DEVELOP, BUT THINGS THAT WERE DEVELOPED BY REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE MEMBERS AND ARE APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF SEXISM, WHICH TO OUR MEMBERS.

SO THAT THAT'S WE ALL ARE IN THIS TOGETHER.

IN OTHER WORDS, SO WE'RE ALL TRYING TO FIND THE OPTIMAL PLACE AND HOW WE CAN WORK TOGETHER AND SATISFY ALL OF THE EXPECTATIONS AND RULES OF REGULATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION. SO IT IT'S GOOD TO BE CONSIDERED A FRIEND.

SO WE WE WILL BEGIN IN THAT LIGHT THIS MORNING.

YOU, I ASSUME, GOT MY BACKGROUND.

SO YOU KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ME.

YOU PROBABLY KNOW MORE ABOUT ME CERTAINLY THAN I DO ABOUT YOU.

STARTED REALLY LIKE TO. YEAH IF YOU TAKE MAYBE A MINUTE OR SO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT JUST TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELVES AND YOUR PERSPECTIVE AND THEN YOUR ROLE IN THE BOARD. I USED TO BE THE NEWEST ELECTED, BUT NOT ANYMORE.

I'M RELATIVELY NEW.

THERE'S TWO NEWER THAN ME, BUT I'VE BEEN IN MY SECOND YEAR.

MY MY BACKGROUND IS PRETTY MUCH AN ENTREPRENEURIAL PERSON OWNING A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT COMPANIES FROM RADIO STATIONS TO PHONE COMPANIES, DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT FINDING THIS COMPANY AND JUST JUST ENTREPRENEURIAL TYPE.

BUT 13 YEARS WITH THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT.

AS AN AUDITOR BEFORE I DID THAT WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

[00:05:03]

AND IT WAS CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF PARKLAND HOSPITAL HERE IN DALLAS.

YEAH. YEAH. SO YEAH.

SO THAT'S KIND OF MY BACKGROUND.

AND I JUST I TELL EVERYBODY, I'M LIKE A KID IN A CANDY STORE.

THIS IS ONE OF THE GREATEST OPPORTUNITIES THAT I'VE HAD IN MY 78 YEARS OF LIFE.

AND I'M JUST REALLY EXCITED ABOUT WHAT I CAN BRING TO THE TABLE AND AND AGITATE AS MUCH AS I CAN DISRUPT THIS DISRUPTIVE BUT IN A GOOD WAY.

DEANNA FLORES, I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD SINCE 1996.

A LARGE FOCUS OF MINE HAS BEEN IN HIS DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION.

AND I WORKED IN THE NONPROFIT SECTOR.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO TELL THE OTHER STUFF.

OKAY. I'VE GOT TO.

I'M A RETIRED ANESTHESIOLOGIST.

I HAVE ALWAYS MADE PUBLIC SERVICE PART OF MY LIFE.

I STARTED IN THE 1980S.

WHEN I STARTED PRACTICE, THAT'S WHEN I STARTED VOLUNTEERING FOR DIFFERENT THINGS.

I'VE SERVED ON FINANCE COMMITTEE FOR MEDICARE.

I'VE SERVED ON THE STATE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS.

I'VE SERVED ON THE BOARD.

I STARTED WITH DISD IN HIGH SCHOOL FOR THE HEALTH PROFESSIONALS ADVISING THERE.

AND I'VE JUST ALWAYS HAD MY FINGER IN EDUCATION SOMEHOW BECAUSE I'VE MENTORED.

THANK YOU. I'M MONICA LIRA-BRAVO.

I AM STARTING MY SECOND TERM ON THE BOARD.

I'VE BEEN ON HERE SIX YEARS.

MY DAY JOB IS AS AN IMMIGRATION LAWYER.

I HAVE MY OWN FIRM, SO I HAVE TO RUN A BUSINESS.

I KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.

I JOINED THIS BOARD MOSTLY BECAUSE AS AN IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY, I ALWAYS GOT QUESTIONS FROM PARENTS ON HOW CAN I HELP MY STUDENTS NAVIGATE A HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE UNDOCUMENTED? AND SO SEEING AS HOW HERE IN DALLAS COLLEGE, WE SERVE A HIGH POPULATION OF IMMIGRANT STUDENTS, I FELT LIKE I COULD PURSUE MY PASSION OF HELPING PEOPLE AND HELPING THEM GET HIGHER EDUCATION.

BILL RITTER, VICE CHAIR OF THE BOARD.

I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE COLLEGE FOR OVER 25 YEARS THROUGH INITIALLY THE DALLAS COLLEGE FOUNDATION AND MONICA.

I'M STARTING MY SECOND SIX YEAR TERM ON THIS BOARD.

I SPENT A LARGE PART OF MY CAREER AT TEXAS INSTRUMENTS AND GOT TO KNOW SOME FOLKS IN AUSTIN AT IBM AND DAN MCRAVEN AND MOTOROLA THAT YOU WORK WITH. THAT'S HOUSTON AND ANOTHER PERSON.

SO I LOVE RUNNING WITH PEOPLE LIKE THAT WHO JUST HAVE A PASSION FOR EDUCATION.

AND I'M SURE WE'RE GOING TO LEARN A LOT FROM YOU TODAY.

THANK YOU. I'M CHARLOTTE COMPTON.

THIS IS MY FOURTH TERM ON THIS PARTICULAR.

MY BACKGROUND. I'VE DONE A NUMBER OF THINGS OVER THE YEARS, BUT NOT EVERY BUSINESS MEANT SOMETHING.

I'VE SERVED ON A NUMBER OF BOARDS THROUGHOUT THE CONVENTION AND TOURISM, AND THAT'S ABOUT IT.

IT'S ABOUT PALMER, NEXT TO THE YOUNGEST ON THE BOARD.

45 YEARS IN IN CHAMBER WORK, 33 YEARS IN GARLAND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

THE WAY I DEFINE IT IS IS GETTING PEOPLE READY TO ACHIEVE THEIR HIGHEST LEVEL IN LIFE.

SO WHEN THE OPPORTUNITY CAME TO RUN AND TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD, I'D, I'D BE LYING IF I SAID I JUMPED AT IT.

BUT I'M EXCITED TO BE HERE BECAUSE IT'S DAUNTING.

I MEAN, IT'S I USE TWO WORDS HUMBLING AND EXCITING.

AND SO IN TERMS OF MY DAY JOB, I'M CEO OF THE GARLAND CHAMBER AND WORKFORCES IS THE TOP PART OF THAT.

SO THIS DOVETAILS WITH EVERY DAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THAT GIVES ME A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE I SHOULD TAKE THIS AND MAKING SURE THAT I COVER EVERYTHING THAT YOU NEED TO KNOW.

AS DR.

LONDON INDICATED, WE ARE AN ACCREDITING AGENCY AND PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW WHY IS AN ACCREDITING AGENCY CONCERNED ABOUT WHO WOULD WORK? WELL, I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU SOME OVERVIEW INFORMATION SO YOU HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHY WE'RE EVEN CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT BOARDS DO.

AND THAT'S SOME PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT ACCREDITORS SHOULD NOT BE CONCERNED ABOUT BOARDS.

[00:10:04]

THERE ARE.

THE GOALS OF THIS WORKSHOP UP HERE FOR YOU TO TALK ABOUT THE SOUTHERN ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES AND SCHOOLS.

WE HAVE NOT ALWAYS BEEN KNOWN BY THAT NAME.

WE USED TO BE CALLED JUST SAKS.

AND AT THAT TIME WE WERE ENGAGED IN ACCREDITATION WITH K THROUGH 12 AS WELL AS COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.

WE HAD A PARTING OF THE WAYS A FEW YEARS AGO AND WE KEPT THE PARENT ORGANIZATION SACS, BUT THE COLLEGE PART OF IT BECAME THE SAKS COMMISSION ON COLLEGES AND THE K THROUGH 12.

BASICALLY, IT BECAME SOMETHING KNOWN AS K.C..

AND YES, AT THIS POINT, WHO PUT YOU ALL INTO EXISTENCE? WHY DO YOU EXIST IN DO WE? I'M GOING TO GET TO THAT.

BUT WE EXIST BECAUSE SEVERAL INSTITUTIONS IN THE SOUTHERN REGION WANTED TO HAVE A WAY OF VALIDATING QUALITY AND HIGHER EDUCATION.

AND THAT GOES BACK TO THE 1800S.

AND WE'LL TALK. WE OPERATE ON SOMETHING CALLED THE PRINCIPLES OF ACCREDITATION.

THIS IS THIS BOOK WHICH IS AVAILABLE TO YOU ONLINE FOR FREE AND IS CHANGED PERIODICALLY.

IT WAS DONE MOST RECENTLY IN DECEMBER OF 2017.

WE'LL DO IT AGAIN 2027.

BUT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE UNDERGOING A MID-TERM REVISION, WHICH WILL BE APPROVED AT THE DECEMBER MEETING IN 2023.

SO THIS IS WHAT GUIDES US.

IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S IN THIS, THEN YOU GO TO THIS, WHICH IS CALLED A RESOURCE MANUAL, WHICH WILL GIVE YOU SOME UNDERSTANDING OF THE PRINCIPLES OF ACCREDITATION WHICH ARE LISTED ON THE SCREEN.

THERE ARE SEVERAL TYPES OF ACCREDITING AGENCY AGENCIES.

WE WERE FOR YEARS KNOWN AS A REGIONAL ACCREDITATION AGENCY THAT WAS CONSIDERED THE GOLD STANDARD.

THERE WERE SEVEN OF US THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES.

ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO, THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CHANGED OUR DESIGNATION TO MAKE US INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION DESIGNEES. SO NOW THE NATIONAL ACCREDITORS, WHO I LISTED FIRST HERE, WHO WERE LARGELY FOCUSED ON FOR PROFIT EDUCATION, ARE NOW CONSIDERED ALONG WITH THE REGIONAL ACCREDITATION PRACTICES AS INSTITUTIONAL CREDITORS.

SO WE'RE NOW IN THE SAME GROUP AND WE EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT CALLED REGIONAL ACCREDITORS BY THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, WE MAY STILL CALL OURSELVES REGIONAL ACCREDITORS.

HOWEVER, THE THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT WE CAN ACCREDIT SCHOOLS OUTSIDE OF OUR REGION.

AND THERE'S A LONG HISTORY TO THAT.

IF ANYBODY WHO HAS AN ACCREDITATION PUT IN INTO THIS WAS NO MORE, I CAN TELL YOU ABOUT ALL THE REST OF THAT, BUT THAT'S A LONG STORY.

BUT WE ENDED UP BEING IN THE SAME GROUP.

YES. RIGHT, EXACTLY.

WHAT IS YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION? OKAY, THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S COMING UP TO OK AND SOME MIGHT QUESTIONS WHILE WE'RE DOING WHY I STARTED HERE.

IT'S BECAUSE PEOPLE USUALLY DON'T HAVE THE BACKGROUND ABOUT HOW THIS ALL OPERATES.

THEN THEY'RE SPECIALIZED ACCREDITORS WHO DO PROGRAMS, THE BUSINESS SCHOOL.

SOME OF YOU MIGHT BE FAMILIAR WITH THEIR WORK WITH BUSINESS SCHOOLS.

THEY HAVE THEIR OWN ACCREDITED WHO ACCREDIT ONLY BUSINESS SCHOOLS, AND THAT IS TYPICALLY ABOVE INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION.

WE DO THE ENTIRE INSTITUTION, BUT PEOPLE IN LAW AND BUSINESS AND OTHER PROFESSIONS WILL HAVE THEIR ENGINEER WILL HAVE THEIR OWN ACCREDITORS, AND THEIR STANDARDS ARE MORE SPECIFIC TO THAT AREA OF ENDEAVOR THAN THAN OURS.

OURS ARE MUCH MORE GENERAL.

ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? SO WE'RE INSTITUTIONAL.

WE'RE AN INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION.

WE GET STARTED GOING BACK TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT QUALITY.

AND, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THIS IS A DIFFICULT SUBJECT BECAUSE PEOPLE THOUGHT THAT EDUCATION IN THE SOUTH WAS SOMEHOW INFERIOR TO EDUCATION

[00:15:08]

AND THERE WERE SOME SCHOOLS, INCLUDING DUKE UNIVERSITY AND EMORY UNIVERSITY AND ABOUT SEVEN OTHERS WHO GOT TOGETHER AND STARTED THE SOUTHERN ASSOCIATION TO DEMONSTRATE THAT WE HAD STANDARDS BY WHICH WE MEASURED SCHOOLS AND THAT WE WERE IN FACT QUALITY INSTITUTIONS.

SO QUALITY IS THE FIRST PART OF WHAT WE'RE ABOUT, MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE PROVIDING WHAT WE SAY WE'RE PROVIDING, AND THAT IS OF AN ACCEPTABLE QUALITY. EXCUSE ME.

YES. SO SEXY TAKES THE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES IN THE SOUTHERN REGION THROUGH AN ACCREDITATION PROCESS. RIGHT. TO TO DETERMINE IF THEY'RE GOING TO KEEP THAT ACCREDITATION OR OR IF THEY'RE GOING TO GET IT INITIALLY AS WELL.

SO THIS INCLUDES DOES IT INCLUDE JUST THE PUBLIC ONES OR DOES IT INCLUDE THE PRIVATE ONES? EVERYBODY OK.

SO BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT WE ARE ACCREDITED BY SEXY.

SEXY? WELL, IT'S EASIER FOR ME TO PRONOUNCE SEXY, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'LL SOUND LIKE SEXY.

OKAY. I KNOW WHERE MY BRAIN.

JUST THOSE NEW GLASSES.

SO, IN OTHER WORDS, SMU GOES THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS AS DALLAS COLLEGE DOES AND VICE VERSA.

YES. SO THAT'S NOT TO SAY BECAUSE A STUDENT GOES TO SMU, THEY'RE GETTING A SUPERIOR EDUCATION TO DALLAS COLLEGE PER SE.

SO SOMEONE HAS THAT PERCEPTION THAT'S NOT BASED IN FACT, IT'S NOT BASED.

IN FACT, WE RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT TYPES OF SCHOOLS WITH DIFFERENT MISSIONS, AND THEY HAVE DIFFERENT ADMISSIONS STANDARDS AND DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS FOR THEIR STUDENTS. AND WE JUDGE THEM BASED ON THE TYPE AND SIZE AND ADMISSION OF THAT INSTITUTION.

SO INSTITUTIONS, A GROUP, SIMILAR INSTITUTIONS ARE GROUPED TOGETHER AND THE STANDARDS ARE THE SAME FOR ALL, BUT THEY ARE NOT MEASURED THE SAME FOR ALL.

YOU WOULD NOT BE EXPECTED TO HAVE A MEDICAL SCHOOL AND SO AND SO AT A COMMUNITY COLLEGE, SO THAT THERE IS AMPLE REPRESENTATION OF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES BASED ON THE DIFFERENT MISSIONS AND TYPES OF SCHOOLS.

AND RIGHT NOW, THE MAJORITY OF OUR MEMBER INSTITUTIONS ARE TWO YEAR INSTITUTIONS.

SO WHERE DO THE FOUR YEARS GO? THEY GO TO US, TOO.

IT'S BECAUSE WE'RE MORE NUMEROUS.

YOU'RE MORE NUMEROUS IN SOME STATES THAN TEXAS AS ONE.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE WITHIN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF MILES.

IS THAT STILL THE CASE? GENERALLY, YES.

AND I KNOW THAT AT LEAST A COUPLE OF OTHER STATES THAT HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT.

SO YOU WOULD HAVE A GREAT NUMBER OF TWO YEAR SCHOOLS AND THEY'RE ALL CALLED BY DIFFERENT NAMES, SOME STILL CALLED JUNIOR COLLEGES, SOMEONE CALLED COMMUNITY COLLEGE, AND SOME ARE JUST REFERRED TO AS TWO YEAR INSTITUTIONS.

DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? THANK YOU. OKAY. IN TERMS OF QUESTIONS OF ACCREDITATION, WE'RE HERE TO TO ENSURE THAT CERTAIN STANDARDS ARE UPHELD.

AND THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT YOU'LL SEE IN THE PRINCIPLES HERE.

THE THING THAT MOST PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT US IS THAT WE'RE THE GATEKEEPER FOR TITLE FOUR FUNDING FROM THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION WITHOUT ACCREDITATION BY A REGIONAL OR OTHERWISE RECOGNIZED ACCREDITED.

INSTITUTIONS. STUDENTS WOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO BOTH PELL AND ALL THE REST OF THE LOANS AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE GUARANTEED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. SO IN OTHER WORDS, AN INSTITUTION WOULD WANT TO HAVE SOME RECOGNIZED ACCREDITATION IN ORDER TO HAVE ACCESS TO FEDERAL FUNDS.

YES. GIVE US AN IDEA OF THE MAGNITUDE OF THE TOTAL FUNDING AND HOW MUCH DOES DALLAS COLLEGE RECEIVE ENTITLED TO FUNDING EVERY YEAR.

WE WEREN'T ACCREDITED. I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

I MEAN, ACTUALLY, I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BILLIONS.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MAJORITY OF OF TUITION DOLLARS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION BUDGET FOR NEW FUNDING THAT GETS DISPERSED THROUGH THE FILTER OF ACCREDITATION.

HOW BIG IS IT? ROUGHLY, I WOULD SAY ROUGHLY TWO THIRDS, AT LEAST OF OF THE REVENUE THAT'S GENERATED BY INSTITUTIONS THROUGH TUITION. SO IT'S MOSTLY SCHOLARSHIP MONEY LIKE PELL AND STUFF IS THAT IT'S LOANS AND SCHOLARSHIPS TO STUDENTS.

AND THEN THERE'S OTHER FUNDING, BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY TIED TO TITLE FOUR, BUT TITLE FOUR IS GENERALLY FOR EDUCATION.

THOSE ARE THE PELL GRANTS.

THOSE ARE OTHER KINDS OF PROGRAMS TO HELP STUDENTS WHO MAY BE IN SPECIAL NEEDS AND THAT SORT OF THING THAT COME THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

[00:20:02]

BUT IT IS A LARGE AMOUNT OF FUNDS.

AND FOR MOST INSTITUTIONS, INCLUDING COMMUNITY COLLEGES, THAT IS THE MAJORITY OF THEIR INCOME STREAM.

SO IF WE LAUNCHED ACCREDITATION, HOW MUCH? YEAH, I MEAN, THAT'S THE MAJORITY OF OUR STUDENTS ARE ELIGIBLE.

I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I MEAN, IT'S MILLIONS THAT AREN'T THE FOR.

IS THERE A TITLE FOR MONEY THAT GOES TO THE STATE THAT THEY THEN CONTROL THAT WE HAVE ACCESS TO? NO. THE TITLE COMES FROM THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

STATES HAVE THEIR OWN RESOURCES THAT THEY DISTRIBUTED TO HCV.

I THINK IT'S STILL IN OPERATION, I THINK AND I'M FORGETTING HIS NAME.

WHO'S HEAD OF HARRISON.

HARRISON IS IN CHARGE OF THAT FOR FOR TEXAS AND THE STATE DOESN'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER.

IT NOW GOES TO SEVEN.

BUT THEY HAVE STATE WE HAVE SOME ACCESS STATE MONEY, RIGHT? YEAH, THERE ARE STATE PROGRAMS. LAST ONE AND THERE'S ANOTHER DEAL HAS PASSED.

BUT YEAH. YEAH.

SO I KNEW THAT I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS FOR MONEY COMING THROUGH TEXAS, KIND OF LIKE MEDICAID MONEY, BUT EVEN AT THE STATE LEVEL, THEY WOULD EXPECT SOME SORT OF ACCREDITATION BEFORE THEY WOULD RELEASE THE STATE FUNDS TO AN INSTITUTION.

DANIEL, ANOTHER WAY ANOTHER WAY TO THINK ABOUT IT IS THAT IF WE DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO TITLE FOR FUNDING, THEN SHORT OF OUR OWN SCHOLARSHIPS, THE STUDENTS WOULD NEED TO PAY OUT OF POCKET IN ORDER TO ATTEND DALLAS COLLEGE.

THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO.

THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR STUDENTS ARE ACCESSING SOME SORT OF FINANCIAL AID TO BE ABLE TO TAKE CLASSES.

IF WE DO NOT HAVE ACCREDITATION, THEY DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THAT.

AND WE ARE THEN LEFT WITH FUNDING FUNDING OUR OWN SCHOLARSHIPS FOR STUDENTS OR THEM PAYING OUT OF POCKET.

LIKE YOU SAID WHEN YOU STARTED OFF WITH HOW YOU CAME INTO BEING, IT USED TO BE OVER THE K THROUGH 12 THE TEXAS IS THAT UNDER THE DEA IS THAT IS BASICALLY OVERSEAS WHETHER ISDS ACCREDITED INVESTMENT AND OF COURSE WITH HIGHER EDUCATION COORDINATING BOARD AND EACH STATE HAS A PARALLEL ORGANIZATION LIKE THAT TO OVERSEE EDUCATION AT THE K THROUGH 12 AND THE HIGHER EDUCATION LEVELS.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THEM? IF AND TO JUST AMPLIFY THE POINT THAT YOU MADE, THE REASON IT'S NOT MORE THAN TWO THIRDS OF OF THE COST OF OF HIGHER EDUCATION SUPPORTED BY TITLE FOR TUITION DOLLARS IS BECAUSE THERE ARE PRIVATE SCHOOLS THAT HAVE LARGE ENDOWMENTS AND THEY DRAW ON THOSE ENDOWMENTS TO OFFER SCHOLARSHIPS AND AND AID TO STUDENTS.

IF IT WERE NOT FOR THAT, IT WOULD BE AN EVEN HIGHER PERCENTAGE.

SO IT'S A VERY FUNDAMENTAL PART OF FUNDING HIGHER EDUCATION IN THIS COUNTRY.

YOUR QUESTION. WE HAVE THIS THESE CHARACTERISTICS OF OF HIGHER AGE, OF HIGHER EDUCATION ACCREDITATION IS THAT IN OUR CASE, IT'S COMPREHENSIVE.

IT LOOKS AT THE WHOLE SCHOOL IS PERIODIC FOR MANY YEARS WE ONLY DID IT EVERY TEN YEARS.

WE STILL DO IT EVERY TEN YEARS FOR IT FOR A REAFFIRMATION VISIT.

BUT THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION DETERMINED SEVERAL YEARS AGO THAT TEN YEARS WAS TOO LONG AND WE HAD SEVERAL OPTIONS.

ONE OF THOSE WAS THAT WE COULD DO IT EVERY SEVEN YEARS RATHER THAN EVERY TEN YEARS, OR WE COULD DO A MID-TERM REVIEW AND SACS EOC OPTED FOR THE MID-TERM REVIEW.

SO WE HAVE THE FIFTH YEAR REVIEW, WHICH IS A REVIEW OF 17 OF THE STANDARDS OF THE PRINCIPALS HERE DURING THE FIFTH YEAR. AND A FOLLOW UP ON SOMETHING WE CALL THE QIP, WHICH IS A QUALITY ENHANCEMENT PLAN, WHICH IS ANOTHER THING THAT GREW OUT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, SAYING THAT WE HAD TO BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT OUR MEMBER INSTITUTIONS WERE CONCERNED WITH IMPROVING THEMSELVES, CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT, AND WE OPTED TO USE THE RFP AS A WAY OF DOING THAT RATHER THAN SOME OTHER MORE INTRUSIVE WAYS THAT HAVE BEEN USED BY SOME OTHER ACCREDITORS TO HAVE INSTITUTIONS DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY'RE FOCUSED ON STUDENT OUTCOMES AND CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT.

HOW ARE YOU FUNDED BY THE MEMBERSHIP? WE'RE INTERESTED IN INSTITUTIONAL OUTCOMES, HOW WELL STUDENTS ARE DOING, HOW ARE YOU DOING AND MAINTAINING YOUR MISSION?

[00:25:12]

YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A MEMBER OF AXIOS.

BUT IF YOU WERE NOT, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO TITLE FOUR AND YOU HAVE TO BE A MEMBER OF SOMEBODY ELSE'S RECOGNIZED ACCREDITING AGENCY.

AND I KEEP USING RECOGNIZING THAT COME UP IN A MINUTE.

SO IT MEANS THAT YOU HAVE TO BE THE ACCREDITING AGENCY HAS TO BE RECOGNIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

IT'S NONGOVERNMENTAL.

IT'S A DECENTRALIZED NATIONAL SYSTEM.

AND THE ACCREDITATION PART OF THIS IS NONPROFIT, EVEN THOUGH WE WILL ACCREDIT FOR PROFIT INSTITUTIONS IN QUESTION, BECAUSE SOMETIMES THAT IS A BIT EARLY TO TALK A LITTLE LATER ABOUT THE EVALUATION CRITERIA THAT YOU USE IN ACCREDITATION.

AND I'M PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN THE RELATIVE WEIGHT THAT YOU GIVE TO THE ACADEMIC PORTION OF THE INSTITUTION AS AS CONTRASTED TO THE STUDENT SERVICES MISSION.

I MEAN, ARE YOU LOOKING AT BOTH? WE'RE LOOKING AT ALL IT IS COMPREHENSIVE.

IT LOOKS AT EVERYTHING. I'LL SHARE WITH YOU SOME STORIES WITHOUT GIVING YOU THE NAMES OF THE INSTITUTIONS AS WE GO THROUGH THIS.

BUT BEING ACCREDITED BASICALLY GIVES US LEGITIMACY.

YOU COULD PUT IT THAT WAY.

IT'S A STAMP OF QUALITY.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE JUST APPROVED.

YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH THE SEXIEST SEAL.

WHICH INSTITUTIONS CAN USE AS LIKE A SEAL OF GOOD STANDING TO TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE INSTITUTION IS ACCREDITED? WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY SUCH THING BEFORE, AND INSTITUTIONS WERE USING THE S.O.S.

LOGO, AND THAT'S NOT PERMITTED BY LAW.

SO WE HAD TO COME UP WITH WAYS THAT INSTITUTIONS CAN HAVE A SEAL TO TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY'RE THEY'RE OKAY WITHOUT HAVING TO WRITE THAT EXPLICIT STATEMENT ABOUT ACCREDITATION THAT YOU HAVE TO DO WHEN YOU GO THE REAFFIRMATION THAT YOU'LL DO ANYTHING FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE MEMBERS, THAT ENLIGHTENS THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE VALUE OF WHAT YOU'LL BRING TO OUR INSTITUTION.

YES, WE DO. AS A MATTER OF FACT, MOST OF THE PUBLIC HAS NO IDEA OF WHAT ACCREDITATION IS OR WHAT WHAT AN AGENCY LIKE SAC SEALS DOES. WE DO HAVE A PUBLIC RELATIONS PIECE AND WE HAVE A WEBSITE WHICH DISCUSSES THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT WE DO AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S AVAILABLE TO TO THE PUBLIC.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID MOST RECENTLY, BECAUSE IF YOU PROBABLY DON'T KNOW, ACCREDITATION IS NOT ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT YOU GO TO BED JUST DREAMING ABOUT AND THINKING ABOUT. SO UNLESS SOMEBODY SAID SOMETHING TO YOU ABOUT IT, YOU PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE KEPT UP WITH THIS.

BUT FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT ACCREDITATION.

SO WE DEVELOPED A FLIER THAT WE PASS OUT TO ELECTED OFFICIALS AND OTHERS IN THE IN THE HIGHER EDUCATION COMMUNITY THAT DESCRIBES WHAT IT IS THAT WE DO AND INQUIRE WHAT WE DO IS IMPORTANT.

YOU KNOW, I THINK IN THE PRESENTATION WE JUST DID LAST NIGHT, I THINK IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT IN THE FUTURE THAT YOU ADD A SLIDE OR TWO OR SOMETHING THAT EVEN ENLIGHTENS THE SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS OF WHY THEY SHOULD TRUST THEIR KIDS TO THE TO THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE.

SO, YEAH, THIS IS A PRESENTATION OF THE CEDARVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL.

SO I THINK IN THE FUTURE, SOME OF THEM WANT TO DO THE SAME THING THAT I THINK THAT'D BE A GOOD GET THEIR PREP CENTER OR WHATEVER AND PUT IT IN THAT ACTUALLY WE HAVE TO PROVIDE IT. YEAH, WE ARE A MEMBER OF SOMETHING CALLED C REC, WHICH IS THE COUNCIL OF ALL THE REGIONAL FORMER REGIONAL ACCREDITING AGENCIES.

YOU'RE NOT OFFICIALLY THAT ANYMORE.

THIS GROUP MEETS TO TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THEIR MEMBERS ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL GUIDELINES AS THEY RELATE TO ACCREDITATION.

RECENTLY, THEY HAVE BEEN LIMITED ON WHAT THEY CAN DO.

SINCE NOW THAT WE ARE INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITORS, WE ARE IN COMPETITION WITH EACH OTHER, WHICH MEANS WE ARE SUBJECT TO ANTI-TRUST LAWS.

IF WE GET TOGETHER AND WORK IN CAHOOTS WITH EACH OTHER, WE CAN'T DO THAT.

SO THE WHOLE ROLE OF THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN CHANGED AS A RESULT.

THAT'S THE CIGARET HOUSE THAT HAS BEEN CHANGED AS A RESULT OF THE INSTITUTE.

THE ACCREDITOR HAS BEEN CONSIDERED INSTITUTIONAL APPROACHES AND THERE IS SOME JUSTIFICATION FOR FOR MAKING THAT MOVE, SINCE A LOT OF INSTITUTIONS WILL HAVE BRANCH CAMPUSES OR OFF CAMPUS INSTRUCTIONAL SITES OUTSIDE OF THEIR STATES.

[00:30:01]

CLEARLY, YOU ARE MORE THAN JUST A REGIONAL ACCREDITOR.

AND MANY OF US, MANY OF OUR REGIONAL ACCREDITORS, FORMER REGIONAL ACCREDITORS, HAVE CAMPUSES OUT OF THE COUNTRY AS WELL.

I KNOW I HAVE TWO SCHOOLS IN MEXICO THAT ARE ASSIGNED TO ME.

WE HAVE SCHOOLS IN PERU.

WE HAVE SCHOOLS IN ASIA AND THROUGHOUT EUROPE.

SO WE'RE KIND OF.

ALL OVER THE PLACE. SO SOME JUSTIFICATION NEEDED TO BE MADE.

BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT WE NEEDED TO GO AS FAR AS WE DID WITH THE INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION LABEL.

ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? I'M SORRY TO SAY THAT, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE SAYING ASK ME ANYTHING, I DON'T I DON'T MIND BEING STOPPED.

SO. SO IF YOU'RE A UNIVERSITY OF X, Y, Z, AND YOU'RE HEADQUARTERED IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, AND YOU HAVE A BRANCH CAMPUS IN DUBAI, I MEAN, YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE DUBAI CAMPUS OF THE CONTEXT OF THE ACCREDITATION FOR THE ENTIRE INSTITUTION.

THERE'S NOT A SEPARATE ACCREDITATION JUST FOR FOREIGN AFFILIATED, NO CAMPUSES OF LARGE NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS.

YEAH. AND EVEN THOSE THINGS THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, WHICH MAY RELATE TO TITLE FOUR FUNDING, THEY HAVE TO MEET THOSE STANDARDS AS WELL BECAUSE THEY'RE PART OF OUR STANDARDS.

BUT IT'S BECAUSE THEY WANT THAT RECOGNITION FROM THE GOLD STANDARD, AS IT WERE, FOR ACCREDITATION.

THEY WILL MEET THOSE STANDARDS.

ARE YOU GOING TO TALK LATER ABOUT HOW YOU EVALUATE ONLINE EDUCATIONAL DELIVERY OR JUST A LITTLE BIT, BUT I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WHEN WE GET TO THAT THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

OKAY. WE GET REVIEWED.

WE JUST UNDERWENT REVIEW BY THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

AND IF YOU THINK WHEN WE COME TO YOUR CAMPUS FOR A REAFFIRMATION REVIEW IS TOUGH.

YOU OUGHT TO GO THROUGH THE REVIEW THAT WE GO THROUGH IN WASHINGTON.

WE JUST FINISHED IT AND WE'RE STILL ALIVE.

AND WE HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED AGAIN BY THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, BY NTSIKI, WHICH IS A PANEL THAT WE WE GO BEFORE EVERY FIVE YEARS, WE DON'T GO EVERY TEN, EVERY FIVE YEARS AND THEY DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE OPERATING ACCORDING TO WHAT THE STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED AND WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE SERVING OUR CLIENTS WELL.

IT'S A VERY TOUGH REVIEW PROCESS.

I THINK THERE WERE MORE THAN 2000 PAGES INCLUDED IN THE DOCUMENT THAT WE HAD TO PREPARE TO SUBMIT TO THEM.

WHAT DOES IT WHAT DOES THAT ACRONYM NATIONAL ASSOCIATION ITS ENSURING QUALITY.

THE Q IS FOR QUALITY, BUT I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY I COULD GET IT FOR YOU.

I ALWAYS GET HUNG UP ON THIS, BUT IT'S ABOUT ENSURING QUALITY AND EDUCATION.

I'LL GET IT FOR YOU BEFORE I LEAVE.

WE CALL IT THE SECRET BECAUSE IT'S THE EASIEST WAY OF SAYING.

NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON INSTITUTIONAL QUALITY AND NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON INSTITUTIONAL QUALITY AND INTEGRITY. QUALITY AND INTEGRITY.

AND THEY VOTE EITHER TO RECOMMEND US OR NOT TO RECOMMEND THIS.

AND OF COURSE WE WILL RECOMMEND IT.

THEY CAN'T MAKE YOU DO WHAT WE CALL FOLLOW UP REPORT, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO ONE OF THOSE RIGHT NOW, SIR.

THAT'S A GOOD THEORETICAL QUESTION.

AND BEFORE THAT, I REMEMBER CITY COLLEGE DISTRICT DIDN'T WANT TO DO SEX.

DIDN'T THEY HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE CERTIFICATION AGENCY? THERE ARE. IN ADDITION TO BEING HAVING ACCESS TO THE OTHER FORM OF REGIONAL ACCREDITING AGENCIES, DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY. YOU CAN GO TO OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION.

A LOT OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS, FOR EXAMPLE, GO TO A RELIGIOUS BASED ORGANIZATION CALLED TRAX, WHICH WILL ACCREDIT INSTITUTIONS AND THEY HAVE ACCESS TO FEDERAL FUNDS THROUGH THAT.

PAUL QUINN IN THIS CITY GOES THROUGH TRACKS AND THAT'S HOW THEY GET ACCESS TO FEDERAL FUNDS.

AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED THEM ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, BECAUSE I VAGUELY REMEMBER THAT THERE WAS ANOTHER CERTIFIED CERTIFYING ORGANIZATION AND MY COLLEGE DISTRICT ENDED UP WITH.

I KNOW IT USED TO STAND FOR SOUTHERN ASSOCIATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

[00:35:04]

AND SO AS HE INDICATED, THERE'S BEEN SOME CHANGES TO THAT IN THE LAST FEW YEARS THAT NOW INSTITUTIONS COULD CONSIDER TO GO SEEK ACCREDITATION FROM ONE OF THE OTHER ACCREDITATION AGENCIES THAT, AGAIN, THEY ALL USED TO BE REGIONAL. BUT BUT INSTITUTIONS HAVE THAT ABILITY TO DO THAT.

SO I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.

WE HAVEN'T. THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS.

LIKE I SAID, IT USED TO BE AS LONG AS THERE RECOGNIZED THE DEPARTMENT OF THE US, THOSE WERE RECOGNIZED NOT ONLY ABOUT THE HISTORIC WHAT MIGHT HAVE PREVIOUSLY EXISTED, BUT YEAH, CURRENTLY NOW BECAUSE OF SOME OF THESE CHANGES, THERE ARE THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS.

AND THESE OPTIONS HAVE NOT ALWAYS EXISTED.

THEY HAVE EXISTED ABOUT THREE OR FOUR YEARS, BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD ANYBODY TO CHANGE OR TO SEEK A CHANGE SO FAR BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE LATITUDE TO DO SO.

IT'S IT'S A CUMBERSOME PROCESS, AND IT WAS PROBABLY MORE EXPENSIVE IF YOU OPT TO GO OUTSIDE OF YOUR GEOGRAPHIC AREA.

WHY IS THAT? BECAUSE IT'S PEER REVIEW, WHICH MEANS THAT IF YOU OPTED TO GO WITH THE WEST COAST, YOU'D HAVE TO TREK.

YOU HAVE THE TRAVEL AND ALL THAT FOR FOLKS FOR THE WEST COAST OR NEW ENGLAND OR HIGHER EARNING COMMISSION IS IN THE MIDDLE PART OF THE COUNTRY, WHICH IS PROBABLY GEOGRAPHICALLY THE CLOSEST ONE TO US.

AND THEN THERE'S MIDDLE STATES THAT YOU COULD CHOOSE FROM AS WELL.

BUT IT BECOMES AN EXPENSIVE PROPOSITION BECAUSE THE INSTITUTIONS HAVE TO PAY FOR ALL THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF LIKE CONFERENCES OR EVALUATIONS FOR THE EVALUATION.

I THOUGHT THEY CAME HERE TO GO THERE, TOO.

BUT SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY FOR. NO.

THEY PAY HERE. YEAH.

INSTITUTIONS PAY FOR THAT.

NOW, OBVIOUSLY, THAT'S NOT DONE WITH A GREAT DEAL OF FREQUENCY, BUT.

RIGHT. WE'RE HAVING FOLKS COME HERE.

THERE IS EXPENSE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM.

IF YOU DO A SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE LIKE ADDING A DEGREE LEVEL LIKE YOU DID, YOU WOULD HAVE PEOPLE COME FOR THAT AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

IF THAT WERE AN ISSUE THAT GOT THE ATTENTION OF THE ACCREDITORS AND A SPECIAL COMMITTEE MIGHT BE SENT IN, THAT WOULD BE AN EXPENSE TO THE INSTITUTION AS WELL. SINCE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT EXPENSES, YOU MIGHT YOU MIGHT MENTION THAT A LITTLE BIT HERE OR LATER, JUST KIND OF THE STRUCTURE. SO LIKE LIKE SOME CHANGE OR OFFSIDES.

WHAT THAT WHAT THAT COST INSTITUTIONS.

EACH TIME WE WE DO SOMETHING KNOW IF WE ADD AN OFFSIDE THAT BECOMES A SUB EXCHANGE.

YOU KNOW WHAT SORT OF COST? I THINK I GET TO THAT IN JUST A LITTLE BIT, SO I'LL BE ABLE TO COVER THAT FOR YOU.

THANK YOU. WE GET RECOGNIZED TO SET BUDGETS OF EDUCATION.

THIS IS OUR STRUCTURE.

THIS IS WHAT I TOLD YOU ABOUT EARLIER, THAT THE COLLEGE DELEGATED TO SOME OF US, THE CEOS OF OUR NEARLY 800 MEMBER INSTITUTIONS.

THAT'S THE ULTIMATE DECISION MAKING GROUP.

YES, SIR. SO THE BOARD AND THE 77 MEMBERS, CAN YOU GIVE US A FLAVOR OF THE BACKGROUNDS OF THOSE PEOPLE? I MEAN, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT ALL COLLEGE ADMINISTRATORS AND STAFF WHO ARE EVALUATING OTHER COLLEGE ADMINISTRATORS, STAFF, OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDER BACKGROUNDS? YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AT LEAST 11 PUBLIC MEMBERS WHO ARE NOT IN HIGHER EDUCATION AT ALL.

THERE'S ONE FROM EACH STATE.

AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT JUST CEOS, BUT YOU'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT PROVOSTS AND OTHER ADMINISTRATORS AND FACULTY MEMBERS FROM INSTITUTIONS.

SO THERE'S A MIXTURE OF FOLK WITHIN THAT 17 MEMBERS.

THE MOST OF THE ACTIVITY, THOUGH, FOUR FOR GOVERNANCE, PROBABLY CENTERS IN THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL WHERE THERE ARE 13 MEMBERS, ONE FROM EACH STATE AND A TO ENSURE ALSO A PUBLIC PUBLIC MEMBER AND A CHAIR FOR THAT COMMITTEE AS WELL.

THAT'S HOW THEY ENDED UP WITH 13.

HOW WERE THOSE PUBLIC MEMBERS APPOINTED AND WHO'S PRESENTLY REPRESENTING TEXAS? I DON'T KNOW WHO'S PRESENTLY REPRESENTING TEXAS, BUT IT IS THROUGH A COUNCIL OF TEXAS, THE TEXAS DELEGATION ON THE BOARD,

[00:40:04]

THEY LET MEMBERS THEMSELVES AND THEY CANVAS THE MEMBER INSTITUTIONS THROUGHOUT THE STATE TO GET NOMINATIONS.

THERE'S A LONG PROCESS WHERE INSTITUTIONS CAN NOMINATE PEOPLE TO SERVE ON THE BOARD.

AND THEN THE THE MEMBERS OF THE TEXAS DELEGATION VOTE ON PERSONS TO BECOME THERE.

SO IT'S A SELF-PERPETUATING IT IS THAT IT DOESN'T INVOLVE THE POLITICAL PARTY LIKE THE GOVERNOR OR THE BOARD OR INDUSTRY OR NON-GOVERNMENT.

NONE OF THAT. IT'S ALL INSTITUTIONS EXCEPT PERPETUATING.

IT'S NOT THAT I'M NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

BILL GOODMAN.

BE ON THE LOOKOUT.

BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR A LETTER THAT YOU SHOULD BE GETTING VERY SOON, ASKING YOU TO NOMINATE PERSONS TO SERVE OR TO VOLUNTEER. THAT'S ANOTHER WAY TO GET THERE.

AND WHEN YOU RESPOND TO THAT, YOUR NAME GOES INTO THE HEART.

AND THEN THERE'LL BE ANOTHER ROUND OF COMMUNICATION ASKING YOU TO VOTE ON THE PERSONS WHO'VE BEEN NOMINATED.

NOW THE NOMINATIONS ARE BY INSTITUTIONAL TYPE, WHETHER YOU'RE LEVEL ONE, WHICH IS USUALLY THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE'S ONLY LEVEL TWO BACHELOR'S DEGREE AND LEVEL THREE WITH A FEW NUMBER OF MASTER'S DEGREES.

LEVEL FOUR WITH MASTER'S MORE COMPREHENSIVE INSTITUTIONS WITH MASTER'S DEGREES.

THEN YOU GET INTO THE DOCTORAL RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS AT LEVEL SIX AND SEVEN, BECAUSE THAT'S A SOLICITATION FOR MEMBERSHIP ON THE SEXY BOARD.

COME TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE ORGANIZATION OR TO THE CHANCELLOR.

IT COMES TO THE CHANCELLOR AS A PRESIDENTIAL ORGANIZATION OR CHANCELLOR.

I FOUND THE TEXAS DELEGATION.

I CAN TELL YOU, YOU KNOW, THAT PEOPLE BUT THE TITLES ARE LIKE CHANCELLOR CENTRAL TEXAS COLLEGE AS A MEMBER, THE PRESIDENT OF UTSA, THE PRESIDENT OF GRACE COLLEGE AND DENISON COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER, BECAUSE THAT'S LIKE THE.

SO THAT WOULD BE YOUR POCKET NUMBER.

YEAH, THAT'S SOMEBODY FROM LUBBOCK VICE CHANCELLOR, HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE PROVOST AND SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS, SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY. AND THEN SOMEBODY FROM RICE.

PRETTY DISTINCT FOR A COUPLE COMMUNITY COLLEGES.

GRAYSON RIGHT. GRAYSON COLLEGE AND TEXAS.

THOSE ARE BOTH JEREMY AND BRANT.

BOTH THOSE INSTITUTIONS, THOUGH, THEY'RE LOCAL TO NORTH TEXAS.

THANK YOU. I GET YOUR QUESTION.

YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT THE BOARD MEMBERS, THE 77 BOARD MEMBERS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE STRUCTURE? HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ON THE APPEALS COMMITTEE? DO YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE ARE 30 MEMBERS ON THE COMMITTEE AS WELL.

13. YEAH, IT'S IT'S A IT'S A IT'S A CONVOLUTED PROCESS TO MAKE CERTAIN LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FOLKS ON THE APPEALS COMMITTEE HAVEN'T HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY PRIOR REVIEW OF THE INSTITUTION.

SO THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE INSTITUTION WITH FRESH EYES.

THAT DOESN'T COME UP EVERY YEAR.

BUT IF THERE IS WHAT THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CALLS A NEGATIVE ACTION AND THE INSTITUTION APPEALS, A NEGATIVE ACTION COULD BE LOSS OF ACCREDITATION WHEN YOU'RE DROPPED FROM MEMBERSHIP, AND YOU WOULD DEFINITELY GET AN APPEAL ON THAT.

SOMETIMES THE INSTITUTION WILL APPEAL GOING ON PROBATION.

THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY AN APPEALABLE ACTION.

BUT IF THE INSTITUTION CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT THE THE PROCESS WAS FLAWED IN SOME WAY, THEN THEY CAN APPEAL BECAUSE IT APPEALS OR HAVE, I DON'T KNOW, IN RECENT MEMORY, THERE ARE VERY FEW INSTITUTIONS THAT GO THROUGH ANY KIND OF TO GET TO THE STAGE.

VERY, VERY FEW.

IT'S A PROCESS THAT IS TILTED TOWARD THE INSTITUTION.

YOU HAVE ALL KINDS OF ALTERNATIVE WAYS OF MAKING SURE YOU DON'T GET TO THIS POINT.

THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS IS IS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE INSTITUTION WITHOUT DAMAGING THE INSTITUTION OR CAUSING THE INSTITUTION TO LOSE MEMBERSHIP.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE VERY, VERY FEW, MAYBE ONE EVERY OTHER YEAR.

I FORGET. I'M LOOKING FOR.

BUT I REMEMBER A COUPLE OF TIMES SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD THAT WE HAD ISSUES COME UP, BUT WE WERE GIVEN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME TO.

Q OR I'M SURE WHATEVER THE ISSUE WAS.

[00:45:03]

A FEW OF THOSE, THOUGH, ARE THOSE ARE A MUCH LOWER LEVEL.

THEY DON'T RISE ALL THE WAY TO WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A NEGATIVE ACTION.

SO IT'S EXACTLY THAT THAT WE HAVE A TWO YEAR PERIOD OF TIME TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL REPORTING AND DOCUMENTATION TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE.

BUT AT LEAST TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE IN THE WHOLE HISTORY OF THE DISTRICT, I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVER HAD AN ISSUE THAT RUNS TO THAT LEVEL, THIS LEVEL OF INCOME.

YOU MAY REMEMBER THIS FIELD.

I THINK THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN MOUNTAIN VIEW.

I'M NOT SURE. OH, NO.

WELL, I'M NOT SURE. BUT YOU REMEMBER WHEN WE HAD THAT ISSUE ABOUT, EXCUSE ME, DIFFERENT CAMPUSES FOR PEOPLE TO TEACH USING DIFFERENT CRITERIA? YEAH, THAT WAS THAT WAS A WARNING THAT WAS ISSUED TO A PARTICULAR INSTITUTION.

AND AGAIN, THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DEMONSTRATE WITH ADDITIONAL REPORTING THAT, THAT THEY CAME INTO COMPLIANCE.

SO EVEN THAT DIDN'T RISE TO THE LEVEL OF OF WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A NEGATIVE THAT FEELS IT'S REALLY AT THE END.

I MEAN, YOU'VE EXHAUSTED EVERYTHING, WHICH IS USUALLY ABOUT FOUR YEARS BEFORE YOU GET TO THIS POINT.

AND THEY HAD TO GO BACK AND UNIFORMLY WRITE THE SAME CRITERIA.

THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT.

YEAH. YEAH. SO THE APPEALS OR SOMETHING HAS GONE BAD.

WRONG IF YOU GET TO THAT.

AND SO SO YEAH. I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVER WE'RE BETTER EVER HAD.

I DON'T RECALL YOUR AND BEFORE I STARTED TO WORK WITH S.A.C., I USED TO BE CHAIR OF THAT BOARD.

SO I'VE GOT A LONG HISTORY WITH THEM.

I DON'T RECALL DALLAS COLLEGE COMING UP OR ANY OF ITS FORMER INSTITUTIONS COMING UP BEFORE SAXOPHONE FOR APPEALS. YOU TYPICALLY KNOW IT'S IN THE PAPER.

WHEN IT GETS TO THAT LEVEL, EVERYBODY KNOWS ABOUT IT, BUT YOU GET TO THAT STAGE, THEN YOU'RE PRETTY MUCH SO IN DANGER OF LOSING YOUR CREDIT THAT GETTING KICKED BACK.

YOU GENERALLY HAVE BEEN KICKED OUT AND YOU APPEALING BEING KICKED OUT.

SO THIS IS SERIOUS WHEN YOU GET TO APPEALS.

SO WE'VE HAD TO LUG NOTES BACK AND FORTH THROUGH THE YEARS, BUT NOTHING TO GET TO THIS LEVEL.

SO YOU HAVE SUPPOSED TO BE GOOD AND WELL, THAT, YOU KNOW, A PROMISE IS JUST THAT A PROMISE.

YOU HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU'VE CORRECTED THE DEFICIENCY.

AND THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GIVEN A NUMBER OF YEARS TO SOME OF THESE THINGS.

YOU CAN'T CORRECT IN IN A YEAR.

IT TAKES A COUPLE OF YEARS OR MORE.

AND WHEN I TALKED TO INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE GOING THROUGH REAFFIRMATION, SO DON'T WAIT UNTIL THE YEAR BEFORE YOU START.

YOU'VE GOT TO START AT LEAST TWO YEARS TO GIVE YOURSELF ENOUGH TIME TO DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME SHOCKS.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT THINGS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THAT YOU DON'T KNOW ARE THERE AREN'T TIME, CORRECT? I'M SORRY. PROBATION.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

WARNING I MEAN MONITORING REPORT FOR UP TO TWO YEARS, WARNING PROBATION AND THEN PROBATION FOR GOOD CAUSE. SO THAT'S A LONG TIME.

IF YOU CAN'T CORRECT IT, YOU'VE GOT A SERIOUS PROBLEM.

AND THAT'S WHY YOU END UP GETTING DROPPED FROM MEMBERSHIP.

FOUR YEARS IS ENOUGH TIME FOR FOR ALMOST ANYTHING TO BE CORRECTED.

77 TRUSTEES AND JUSTICES WERE THERE FROM WE RECENTLY ADOPTED AS AS THE SLIDE SHOWS THE REQUIREMENT OF HAVING AN INTERNATIONAL MEMBER SINCE WE HAVE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS THERE ALSO INCLUDED HOW MANY INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS ARE PART OF THE INDEX. I DON'T KNOW THE TOTAL NUMBER, BUT IT IS THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR AND OUR INTERNATIONAL MEMBERS, WHICH THERE ARE FEWER OF THEM, PROBABLY FEWER THAN TEN, BUT A NUMBER.

PROBABLY MORE THAN 30 OF OUR MEMBER INSTITUTIONS IN THIS COUNTRY HAVE BRANCHES IN OTHER COUNTRIES.

SO JUST TO RECOGNIZE THAT THAT THAT WHOLE AREA, THE BOARD DECIDED THAT THEY WOULD DESIGNATE ONE OF THE BOARD SPOTS FOR A MEMBER FROM ANOTHER NATIONAL MEMBER.

AND THERE YOU HAVE IT, 32 REPRESENTATIVES FROM MEMBER INSTITUTIONS.

THERE IS A DESIRE TO HAVE A BALANCE IN TERMS OF GENDER, RACE TYPE OF

[00:50:05]

SO SOME OF THOSE MEMBERS, SOME OF THOSE BOARD MEMBERS ARE ELECTED AT LARGE RATHER THAN BEING ELECTED BY THE DELEGATION FROM THE STATE. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO KNOW AS WELL.

SO THERE IS SOME LATITUDE THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS BROADER REPRESENTATION ON THE BOARD.

AND WHAT I TOLD YOU EARLIER.

DIFFERENT LEVELS OF INSTITUTIONS ACROSS THE BOARD MEET TWICE A YEAR.

AND SOMEONE ASKED HER WHAT THE WAY THEY WERE JUST PRESENCE.

AND THERE YOU SEE THAT PRESENCE OF THE ADMINISTRATORS, FACULTY MEMBERS AS WELL FROM OTHER INSTITUTIONS.

SO THE SEXY HAVE A STRATEGIC PLAN, A VISION, A MISSION, ETC..

SO IF YOU MEET TWICE A YEAR, HOW DO YOU GET HOW DOES THE BOARD GET ITS WORK DONE? THE BOARD GETS MOST OF ITS WORK DONE THROUGH THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL THAT MEETS NOT ONLY MEETS THREE TIMES A YEAR AND MEETS PRIOR TO THE BOARD MEETING AND MEETS PERIODICALLY AS NECESSARY.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS HAPPENED, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE PANDEMIC, IS THAT THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN GETTING TOGETHER ELECTRONICALLY ON ZOOM.

YEAH, VIRTUALLY ALMOST EVERY MONTH.

SO THAT'S THE WAY IT'S DONE.

BUT THAT IS A WELL-OILED MACHINE THAT YOU GO THROUGH A PROCESS OF COMMITTEES THAT WORK THROUGH CHANGES THAT BUBBLE UP, GO THROUGH A REVIEW AND GET TO THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL AND OR THE BOARD IS AS REQUIRED BY OUR BYLAWS.

SO BY THE TIME IT GETS TO THE BOARD, IT COMES THROUGH THE COMMITTEE STRUCTURE, EXECUTIVE COUNCIL, PRETTY MUCH THE BOARD JUST VOTES IN PROCESS THINGS NOT ALWAYS.

AND I RECALL A MEETING HERE IN DALLAS WHERE WE THOUGHT SOMETHING WAS GOING TO GO THROUGH AND WE PASSED.

AND THEN ONE OF THE MEMBERS WHO WAS NOT ON THE BOARD OR THE COUNCIL GOT UP AND STOPPED IT.

SO THAT'S NOT ALWAYS THE CASE.

IT IS DESIGNED SO THERE WOULD BE EFFICIENCY AND THAT EVERYBODY WOULD NOT TRY TO GO THROUGH ACROSS EVERY AREA.

BUT IT'S NOT ALWAYS THE CASE THAT IT RUNS THROUGH WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL AND THE BOARD.

WHO MAKES UP THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL? THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL IS MADE UP OF MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES.

IT'S ONE REPRESENTATIVE FROM EACH STATE.

YOU STILL HAVE QUESTIONS? WELL, SOMETIMES YOU CAN LOOK AT MY FACE.

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL IS LIKE THE OFFICES OF THE.

NO, THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

THERE'S A REPRESENTATIVE FROM EACH OF THE STATES, INCLUDING A PUBLIC MEMBER, AND THEN THERE'S A CHAIR WHO OBVIOUSLY IS FROM ONE OF THE STATES, TOO.

AND THAT'S 13. AND WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR GETTING THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL THE DELEGATION FROM YOUR STATE WOULD REPRESENT WHAT? IT'S PERSON BEYOND THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL.

I THINK WE'VE TALKED ENOUGH ABOUT THE APPEALS.

WE DO REQUIRE AN ARBITRATION POLICY.

THANK YOU. TRYING TO CUT DOWN ON THE NUMBER OF LAWSUITS WHEN THAT'S A NEGATIVE ACTION AGAINST AN INSTITUTION.

AND NOW WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR ARBITRATION, WHICH IS BINDING.

YOU GET A CHANCE TO READ THAT AS WELL, AND I'LL MAKE THESE FILES AVAILABLE TO YOU IF YOU WANT TO MATCH THE MEETING.

I'M GETTING A LITTLE BIT BEHIND SCHEDULE HERE, BUT I'M TRYING TO SPEED UP WHAT REALLY HAPPENED THAT NIGHT, WHY WE GOT OUT OF.

YOU PROBABLY HAVE THE EARLIER DRAFT.

I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE THIS ONE HERE.

WE DO. SHE SAID THIS MORNING WE GOT BOTH.

THAT'S THE EFFICIENCY OK THE PRINCIPLES OF ACCREDITATION OF THESE THINGS.

HERE WE ARE. WE'RE GOING TO RUN THROUGH THE FAIRLY INTEGRITY BEING ONE OF THE FOUNDATION OF ALL OF THIS.

IF WE FOUND OUT THAT YOU'VE LIED TO US OR BEEN DISHONEST IN SOME WAY, THAT'S THAT'S THE FIRST THING THAT WILL GET YOU AN INSTITUTION IN TROUBLE.

WE HAD AN INSTITUTION SEVERAL YEARS AGO TO TURN IN SOMEBODY ELSE'S SHIP AS THEIR OWN.

SOUNDS RIDICULOUS, DOESN'T IT? THEY DID. THEY WERE DROPPED FROM A MEMBERSHIP INTEGRITY FOUNDATION.

JUST AUTOMATIC.

THEY DIDN'T EVEN GO THROUGH. YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL THAT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.

SO IT WASN'T A WARNING.

THEY GET THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS TO GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO RESPOND.

[00:55:05]

AND SACKS THE MEMBERSHIP SAID DROP THEM IMMEDIATELY AND THEY WERE DROPPED IMMEDIATELY AND WE WERE SUED. THIS IS LONG BEFORE I EVER GOT THE SEXISM.

AND THEY HAD THEIR MEMBERSHIP HAD TO BE RESTORED BECAUSE SARKOZY HAD NOT FOLLOWED HIS OWN PROCEDURE.

SO, YES, YOU DO HAVE TO FOLLOW PROCEDURES.

AND WHAT'S THE MISSION? THE MISSION IS THE MISSION OF THE INSTITUTION.

YEAH. NO, BUT WHAT IS IT? IT'S ONE OF THE PRINCIPLES WE EXPECT THE INSTITUTION TO HAVE A MISSION, TO PUBLISH THE MISSION, AND TO DEMONSTRATE THAT IT FOLLOWS THE MISSION.

I MEAN, WHAT IS THAT MISSION? DOES IT HAVE A MISSION STATEMENT? YES, WE HAVE A MISSION STATEMENT.

WE HAVE ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

WE REQUIRE YOUR VISION.

IT'S ON THE FRONT PAGE OF OUR WEBSITE.

SO IF YOU GO TO SILKEBORG, IT'S IT'S THERE.

AND YOU AND YOU CAN SEE IT.

BUT YOU'RE GOING OVER WHAT EACH INSTITUTION WANTS TO DEAL WITH THE INSTITUTION.

NOT. NOT, NOT SEXY OR SEE, THIS IS IN ORDER OF PRIORITY OR EACH PRINCIPLE HAS ITS OWN WAY.

EACH RUFFLE HAS ITS OWN WAY.

EXCEPT FOR THE FACT, I WOULD SAY THAT INTEGRITY HAS IS THE FOUNDATION.

THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT ARE CALLED STANDARDS AND SOME THINGS THAT ARE CALLED CORE REQUIREMENTS, AND THAT'S A DIFFERENCE.

IF IT'S A CORE REQUIREMENT THAT YOU VIOLATE, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN KEEP YOU FROM BEING REAFFIRMED IN ACCREDITATION AND CAN KEEP YOU FROM BEING HAVING ACCESS, THEREFORE, TO FEDERAL FUNDS.

SO CORE REQUIREMENTS HAVE A HEAVIER WEIGHT, A STANDARDS OF ELIGIBILITY, WHICH ARE ALL OUTLINED IN THE PRINCIPLES THAT TELL YOU WHAT YOU MUST DO IN ORDER TO TO BE BE A MEMBER.

THAT STANDARDS FOR GOVERNING BODIES WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT TODAY.

BUT THE BASIC STANDARDS OF ELIGIBILITY APPLY PRIMARILY TO INSTITUTIONS WHO ARE JUST JOINING FACTS.

YOU'LL SEE FOR THE FIRST TIME THERE WAS A TIME IN OUR PROCESS RECENTLY WHERE EVERY TIME YOU CAME UP FOR REAFFIRMATION, YOU HAD TO DEMONSTRATE YOUR BASIC ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT ANYMORE.

THE BOARD DECIDED THAT'S REDUNDANT AND UNNECESSARY.

THE GOVERNMENT BOARD, AS I UNDERSTAND IN NUMBER FOUR, HAS BECOME A TOPIC OF GREAT CONCERN IN RECENT YEARS.

AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY IN A FEW MINUTES.

ADMINISTRATION ORGANIZATION TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THE STRUCTURE TO OFFER WHAT IT IS THAT YOU SAY YOU'RE GOING TO OFFER THE FACULTY TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE THE APPROPRIATELY CREDENTIALED FACULTY TO TEACH WHAT YOU'RE TEACHING AND TO OFFER CREDIT FOR.

TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE PLANNING AND THAT YOU ARE ASSESSING HOW WELL YOU'RE DOING AND PROVIDING WHAT IT IS THAT THAT YOU OFFER IN THE WAY OF CREDIT BEARING COURSES AND OTHER EXPERIENCES, WHETHER THEY ARE CREDENTIALS OR NOT, SOME OF THEM ARE CREDENTIALS THAT NOT DEGREE REQUIREMENTS. YOU HAVE QUESTION? YES, SIR. I MEAN, IS THIS A GOOD TIME TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FACULTY OR EVEN TALK MORE ABOUT FACULTY LATER? I HADN'T PLANNED TO TALK A LOT ABOUT THEM LATER.

BUT LET ME ASK, BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF INSTANCES IN THE REGION AROUND FREE SPEECH, FACULTY FREE SPEECH RIGHTS, ACADEMIC FREEDOM, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.

AND ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD, AT SOME POINT WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING A WE WILL HAVE A POLICY BROUGHT BACK TO US ON THIS TOPIC IN THE COMING YEAR.

HOW TO SUCCEED AS AN ACCREDITOR YOU INSTITUTIONAL BEHAVIOR REGARDING FACULTY FREE SPEECH AND WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR AND WHAT'S REQUIRED TO ASSURE FACULTY RIGHTS IN THIS AREA? WE WE HAVE A STATEMENT IN OUR PRINCIPLES ON ACADEMIC FREEDOM.

BEYOND THAT, AT THIS POINT, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FORMAL.

WE DO HAVE A COMMITTEE THAT IS LOOKING AT ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH THAT WILL WORK THROUGH THE PROCESS, THROUGH THE MEMBERSHIP.

AND IT MAY GET TO THIS DECEMBER'S MEETING OR IT MAY NOT MAKE IT INTO NEXT YEAR, BUT IT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT IS GENERATED BY THE MEMBERSHIP FOR US TO TAKE A POSITION ON. SO AT THIS POINT, ALL THAT WE HAVE ON THAT IS ACADEMIC FREEDOM, BUT THERE'S A RECOGNITION THAT THAT IS CONCERNED CONCERN BEYOND JUST ACADEMIC FREEDOM. CAN YOU CHARACTERIZE THE STATEMENT THAT'S IN PLACE TODAY? WHAT DOES IT ACTUALLY SAY ABOUT THIS TOPIC?

[01:00:06]

WELL, YEAH. IT OCCURS TO ME AND IT'S INTERESTING ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I'VE BEEN CLEANING OUT MY OFFICE AND I GOT ALL THESE LITTLE BOOKLETS THAT I'VE GOTTEN ON THESE DIFFERENT SUBJECTS AND SOME OF THEIR PUBLICATIONS AND SO FORTH.

BUT IT OCCURS TO ME BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT CONVERSATION.

YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT A POLICY THAT ROB OR SOMEBODY PROBABLY NEEDS FOR YOUR PRESENTATION TO THE LORD TO TALK ABOUT FREE SPEECH AND SO FORTH.

SO WE THOROUGHLY UNDERSTAND.

GOOD. WHAT'S DRIVING THE BUTTONS? SO WE HAD A WE HAD A FIRST READING ON A POLICY BACK IN THE SPRING, I THINK.

AND IT'S STILL COMING BACK AT SOME POINT, RIGHT? THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH. YEAH.

IF RECALL, WE HAD WE HAD AN OUTSIDE ATTORNEY COME IN AND KIND OF BRIEF THIS ON KIND OF THE LANDSCAPE OF POSSIBILITIES. SO YEAH, YOU MIGHT HAVE MISSED THAT ONE, BUT IN PUBLICATION, FREE SPEECH.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE NOT GIVEN A LOT OF LOT OF ATTENTION TO UNTIL RECENTLY.

YEAH. DANIEL, YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO WHAT'S CURRENTLY ON WHAT'S CURRENTLY? YES, IT'S STANDARD 6.4 AND IT SAYS THE INSTITUTION PUBLISHES AND IMPLEMENTS APPROPRIATE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR PRESERVING AND PROTECTING ACADEMIC FREEDOM.

SO YOU A LOT OF THE SEXIEST STANDARDS ARE WRITTEN THIS WAY BECAUSE OF THE DIVERSITY OF INSTITUTION TYPES AND MISSIONS.

IT IS GENERALLY A BROAD STATEMENT.

SO IT'S NOT VERY PRESCRIPTIVE.

IT IS JUST TELLING THE INSTITUTION THAT IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO HAVE POLICIES, PROCEDURES IN PLACE TO PROTECT ACADEMIC FREEDOM AT DALLAS COLLEGE.

AND SO THE REVISION THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, WE'RE WORKING ON REVISING THAT ACADEMIC FREEDOM POLICY TO REFLECT NOW OUR OUR CURRENT STRUCTURE AND TO UPDATE THE SEXY DEFINITION OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM.

AND IS THERE A COMMONLY UNDERSTOOD DEFINITION OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM AMONG SCIENCE INSTITUTIONS? NO, THERE IS NOT.

THE ANSWER TO THAT IS NO, NO.

ALL KINDS OF THINGS HAVE BEEN PUT UNDER THE LABEL OF ACADEMIC.

I USED TO BE A DEAN AND MY FACULTY USED TO COME TO ME WITH ISSUES THAT THEY SAID WERE ACADEMIC.

WELL, THEY WERE NOT ACADEMIC FREEDOM ISSUES.

THEY WERE PERSONAL ISSUES THAT THEY HAD HAD ASCRIBED TO ACADEMIC FREEDOM.

SO IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE INSTITUTION DEFINE WHAT IT MEANS ABOUT ACADEMIC FREEDOM.

AS SHE INDICATED, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE PRESCRIPTIVE.

WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU THE LATITUDE TO DEFINE WHAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR YOU.

SO YOU WILL NEED TO DEFINE WHAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR DALLAS COLLEGE IN THE WAY OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND FOR FREE, FREE SPEECH.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO PRESCRIBE, BUT WE WILL EXPECT YOU TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A REFERENCE POINT, A POLICY THAT WILL PROTECT THE INSTITUTION.

IT SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT JOB FOR THE EDUCATION WORKFORCE COMMITTEE.

DID I? I SAID YES WAY TOO QUICK.

WE HAVE A BUNCH. OF COURSE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY.

FOR INTERNAL FOLKS.

AND IN A LOT OF IT, WE DID GET SOME THOUGHTFUL SPEECH WAS MENTIONED AND SO FORTH.

AND IT WAS AN ISSUE.

IT WAS ACADEMIC FREEDOMS BROUGHT UP.

AND SO, AS YOU HEARD, IT DEPENDS ON WHO YOU ASK, OFTENTIMES WHAT THE DEFINITION IS.

AND PEOPLE HAVE VARYING DEGREES OF WHAT FALLS UNDER THAT.

AND SO THAT'S PART OF WHY WE BROUGHT IN OUTSIDE COUNSEL AND KIND OF HELP US THINK THROUGH AS WE DEVELOP WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN IN DALLAS COLLEGE ON A GO FORWARD BASIS TO MAKE SURE THAT AT ONE, ALSO TO HELP EDUCATE FOLKS INTERNALLY WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT ISN'T UNDER OUR REVIEW.

THAT IS NOT ACADEMIC FREEDOM, RIGHT? YEAH. THAT'S THE HARDEST PART OF IT IS GETTING PEOPLE TO AGREE WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT ISN'T.

LET'S MAKE A COMMENT HERE, BECAUSE OUR MOMENT IS I'M LOOKING FORWARD.

I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE BOARD HAVING THAT CONVERSATION WITH THE CHANCELLOR AND OUR COUNCIL AS TO HOW THAT ALL PLAYS OUT.

AND PART OF THE REASON I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO IT IS ONE OF THE STRENGTHS OF THIS INSTITUTION IS THE DIALOG AND THE TRUST AND THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN OUR FACULTY AND OUR STAFF. AND AND SO I THINK THERE'S A SOLID FOUNDATION TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND FOR US TO SET SOME STANDARDS THAT ARE COMMONLY UNDERSTOOD AMONGST OURSELVES, BUT ALSO

[01:05:08]

I MEAN, WE, WE, WE SET WE THINK THROUGH WHEN WE SAID BEST PRACTICES AND STANDARDS IN THIS AREA.

AND SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT CONVERSATION.

SO, YEAH, NO, I APPRECIATE THAT AND GREAT POINT BECAUSE IN THIS INSTANCE, THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE ARE BEING THOUGHTFUL AND DELIBERATE AS WE'RE ENGAGING WITH FACULTY LEADERSHIP IN A IN A INAPPROPRIATE WAY TO ENGAGE THEM TO GET FEEDBACK.

LET ME MOVE ALONG HERE, UNLESS THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FACULTY AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT, WHICH HAS IN THE LAST TEN YEARS BECOME A BIG ISSUE.

SOME OF YOU MAY BE YOUNG ENOUGH TO REMEMBER A TIME WHEN YOU WENT TO COLLEGE AS A FRESHMAN AND THEY TOLD YOU TO LOOK TO YOUR RIGHT AND LOOK TO YOUR LEFT.

AND ONE OF YOU WOULD NOT BE THAT YOU'RE A MEMBER OF THOSE.

WELL, THAT'S NOT A GOOD ATTITUDE TO HAVE.

YEAH, THAT WAS LAW SCHOOL WHEN IT WAS MY UNDERGRADUATE BASIC TRAINING.

IT HAPPENED IN HIGHER EDUCATION.

SO NOW WE'RE EXPECTING INSTITUTIONS TO DO A BETTER JOB OF HELPING STUDENTS BE SUCCESSFUL RATHER THAN TO WEEDING THEM OUT THROUGH THE.

THROUGH THE PROCESS.

SO STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IS A BIG PART OF THIS, BIG PART OF WHAT THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION LOOKS FOR, ETC., ETC., TO HAVE AN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM STRUCTURE.

YOU HAVE THAT WITH DEPARTMENTS AND UNITS AND HOW YOU ORGANIZE COURSES FOR DELIVERY OF OF OF DEGREES.

EDUCATIONAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.

THAT'S CRITICAL TO MAKING SURE THAT YOU HAVE IN PLACE APPROVED POLICIES AND PROCEDURES BY THE BOARD TO GOVERN THE INSTITUTION.

THAT THAT IS SOMETHING WHERE YOU SHOULD PAY ATTENTION.

OFTENTIMES WHEN INSTITUTIONS ARE CHALLENGED, IT'S BECAUSE EITHER THEY DIDN'T HAVE A POLICY OR THEY DIDN'T FOLLOW THE POLICY.

MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE APPROPRIATE RESOURCES TO THE LIBRARY AND RESOURCES FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE MATRICULATING HERE AND ACADEMIC SUPPORT SERVICES.

THIS GETS INTO A LOT OF THE STUDENT SERVICES AND THE SPECIAL SERVICES THAT MAY BE NEEDED BY STUDENTS WHO HAVE SPECIAL NEEDS.

FINANCIAL AND PHYSICAL REASONS.

THIS IS A HOT TOPIC AS WELL.

MORE SO FOR THE COMMUNITY, FOR THE PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS THAN FOR FOR PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS BECAUSE OF HAVING TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY ARE FINANCIALLY SOLVENT AT THE TIME OF THE REVIEW AND THEY IN FACT HAVE THE PHYSICAL RESOURCES TO OFFER THE PROGRAMS. AND THAT NUMBER 14 YEARS TRANSPARENCY IN SUCH REPRESENTATION, IF YOU ADVERTISE THAT YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING, YOU'VE GOT TO SHOW THAT YOU'RE DOING IT.

YOU CAN'T ADVERTISE IT AND NOT HAVE IT AVAILABLE.

TRANSPARENCY, BEING TRUTHFUL AGAIN, THAT KIND OF HEARKENS BACK TO INTEGRITY.

THE NEW PRINCIPALS AND BOARDS REGULARLY EVALUATE THEMSELVES.

AND FINANCIAL LITERACY.

THOSE ARE NOT SO NEW.

AND THEREFORE, THAT THAT IS PROBABLY ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO THAT THEY CAME CAME IN PLACE.

EVERYBODY WAS BEING EVALUATED EXCEPT THE BOARD.

WE'RE NOT PRESCRIPTIVE ON HOW THE BOARD EVALUATES ITSELF, BUT THE BOARD NEEDS TO ENSURE THAT IT IS BEING EVALUATED AND IS DONE REGULARLY.

I THINK WE FINALLY COME TO A DEFINITION FOR REGULAR LEAK, MEANING NOT LESS THAN, NOT MORE THAN THREE YEARS IN THE SEQUENCE OF SOME INSTITUTIONS.

WE'RE GOING FIVE YEARS IN, BUT THEY DIDN'T HAVE A DEMONSTRATION OF REGULAR EVALUATION WHEN WE CAME BECAUSE THEY'D ONLY DONE IT ONCE AND YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE IT AT LEAST TWICE. FOR US TO BE ABLE TO DEEM IT TO BE REGULAR.

SO I JUST WANT TO REMIND MYSELF AND MY COLLEAGUES, I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN USING THEM, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THE SAXBY BOARD SELF-EVALUATION TEMPLATE FOR AT LEAST THE PAST EIGHT YEARS.

OKAY. SO HOW DOES I MEAN, IS THAT AN APPROPRIATE TEMPLATE AS FAR AS IT'S UP TO YOU WHAT YOU WANT TO CHOOSE TO USE? WE DON'T PRESCRIBE. WE JUST SAY THAT YOU HAVE TO DO.

YEAH, WE CREATED WHEN WE WORKED WITH THE BOARD ON CREATING POLICY AROUND BOARD EVALUATION, WE POINTED OUT THAT THE CAC DOES NOT PRESCRIBE A PARTICULAR VEHICLE OR FOR THAT EVALUATION, BUT WE DO IT ANNUALLY AT DALLAS COLLEGE AND WE FOLLOW THE TEMPLATE THAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED.

[01:10:04]

SO. THOSE WERE A PUBLIC CONCERN, AND THAT'S HOW THEY ENDED UP BECOMING NEW PRINCIPALS. THERE'S A PROCESS THAT WE TAKE INSTITUTIONS THROUGH.

I'M JUST GOING TO SHOW THEM HERE IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

BUT IT STARTS WITH A LEADERSHIP ORIENTATION THAT IS APPROXIMATE.

MAYBE TO YOU NEED A BREAK.

I THINK WE WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ONE MAYBE WHENEVER YOU GET TO A POINT, YOU WANT TO TAKE IT OUT OR LET'S TRY TO GET TO THE END OF THIS AND THINK WE CAN GET BACK TO THE TO THE BOARD LEADERSHIP ORIENTATION THAT USE TAKES PLACE THE DECEMBER TWO YEARS BEFORE THE INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW.

THAT'S A REPORT THE INSTITUTION DOES.

THE FIRST REVIEW IS CALLED AN OFFSITE REVIEW, WHICH IS A GREAT PROCESS, BUT IT'S A PAPER PROCESS IS REVIEWED.

THE OUTCOME IS SENT BACK TO THE SCHOOL.

THE SCHOOL GETS A CHANCE TO DO A FOCUS REPORT AND THEN THERE IS AN ONSITE REVIEW.

THAT'S WHEN WE COME TO YOUR CAMPUS AND VALIDATE WHAT WAS FOUND.

SO NOW YOU HAVE AT LEAST THREE CHANCE, THREE COMMITTEE REVIEWS BEFORE A DECISION IS MADE ON YOUR REAFFIRMATION.

YOU HAVE THE OFFSITE ON SITE, AND THEN THERE'S THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL REVIEW THAT IS WOVEN INTO SOMETHING WE CALL CNR REVIEW, AND THAT'S MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES WHO SERVE TO REVIEW AT THE BOARD LEVEL YOUR YOUR REAFFIRMATION REPORTS AND YOUR FOCUS REPORT THAT GOES ON WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR AN APPROVAL.

RARELY, I THINK YOU ASK THE QUESTION, DOES THE BOARD RUBBER STAMP? RARELY DOES AN INSTITUTION GET REVERSED AT THE BOARD LEVEL.

BUT IT HAS HAPPENED, BUT RARELY DOES IT HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH ALL THE WORK, ALL THE WORK BEFORE YOU.

AND IT IS A LOT OF WORK AND IT'S PART OF THIS PROCESS AND A LOT OF TIMES TO REACT TO, TO.

NOW, THIS IS A GOOD TIME TO STOP.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO TEN MINUTE BREAK.

NICE. IT'S NICE TO GET SOME FACE TIME LIKE THIS OR THIS, TIME TO DO SOMETHING.

NOW OLDER THAN THE YEARS.

SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THE PRIMARY REASON THAT I WAS ASKED TO COME TODAY WAS TO TALK ABOUT THE ROLES OF THE BOARD.

BUT AS I FOUND OUT, HAS BEEN INSTRUCTED TO DO A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ACCREDITATION AS WELL.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT WHAT SEX THE AOC DOES AND DOES NOT DO.

POLICY MAKING IS ONE OF THE PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BOARD.

EVALUATE AND WHEN NECESSARY, TERMINATE THE CEO.

OVERSIGHT FOR FINANCIAL AREAS.

AND LET ME GO BACK TO THAT.

I WILL SAY THAT WE TEND TO HAVE A FAIR AMOUNT OF APPROPRIATE PARTICIPATION IN THE POLICY MAKING FUNCTION OF THE BOARD.

AND I THINK THAT'S TRUE ACROSS THE BOARD WITH INSTITUTIONS THAT I'VE DEALT WITH.

SO TYPICALLY THE ISSUE IN THAT AREA COMES WHEN BOARDS GET INVOLVED MORE IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POLICY, WHICH IS SOMETHING THEY SHOULDN'T DO.

THAT IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE RELEGATED TO THE ADMINISTRATION.

AND IF THERE'S A PROBLEM, THEN THE BOARD SHOULD DEAL WITH THE CEO AND NOT NECESSARILY WITH THE INDIVIDUAL STAFF MEMBERS.

THAT'S WHERE MOST OF THE ISSUES COME UP WITH THE POLICY MAKING FUNCTION THAT SOMETIMES BOARD MEMBERS GET ENGAGED WITH STAFF IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POLICIES.

BUT THE BOARD'S ROLE IS TO MAKE AND APPROVE THE POLICIES FOR THE INSTITUTION.

QUESTION. QUESTION THERE, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ON THIS OVER THE PAST SIX YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD.

[01:15:05]

APPRIZED HE'S OUR PRIMARY.

I MEAN, HE'S THE ONE GUY THAT WE CAN HIRE AND FIRE.

AND HE ALSO HAS EMPOWERED HIS SENIOR EXECUTIVE STAFF IN TERMS OF RELATIONSHIPS WITH INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBERS RELATED TO OUR COMMITTEE ROLES.

AND THAT HAS WORKED WELL.

I THINK TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT PERSONNEL MATTERS BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT IS BECAUSE WE HAVE GOTTEN INTO THIS AND WE HAD A POLICY CHANGE ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO BECAUSE THE BOARD WAS APPROVING EVERY CONTRACT, FACULTY CONTRACT, AND IT WAS IT WAS KIND OF A PRO FORMA THING.

AND THE REASON THE BOARD WAS LOOKING AT THAT AREA WAS TO ASSURE THAT DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION OBJECTIVES WERE BEING MET.

BUT THE BOARD IS NO LONGER DOING THAT.

WE ARE HOLDING THE CHANCELLOR ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE METRICS.

BUT IF YOU CAN JUST OBSERVE AND EXPLORE IN THAT SPACE THE BOARD ROLE AND AND HOW OTHER GREAT INSTITUTIONS APPROACH IT.

I'M GLAD YOU SAID THAT YOU'RE NO LONGER DOING THAT BECAUSE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN INAPPROPRIATE.

YOU HIRED HIM TO DO THE JOB.

IF HE DOESN'T DO THE JOB, YOU DEAL WITH HIM.

AND THAT'S NOT ONLY THE DIVISIVE THING, THAT'S ALL OF IT.

THAT'S IT'S A HEAVY JOB.

WHEN YOU'RE IN THE CEO, YOU BEAR THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL THE STAFF THAT YOU HAVE DOING THE RIGHT THINGS AND PUT IT FORTH THE MISSION OF THE INSTITUTION.

BUT IT'S ON THE CEO.

IF YOU'VE GOT ISSUES, THEN THEY SHOULD GO TO THE CEO.

AND AS YOU GET THIS OUT OF THE WAY, AS YOU JUST INDICATED, THAT YOU HAVE MADE SURE THAT THE CEO IS THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEI IMPLEMENTATIONS. THAT HAS BEEN IT REALLY GETS TO BE A PROBLEM WHEN YOU CAN'T WATCH BASEBALL, YOU CAN'T DETERMINE WHO'S ON FIRST.

AND WHEN IT LOOKS LIKE THE BOARD IS WORKING AGAINST THE CEO, THAT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MISCHIEF AND MISCHIEF WILL OCCUR.

SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT RELATIONSHIPS IS THE RELATIONSHIP NOT ONLY BETWEEN THE CEO AND THE BOARD, BUT THE CEO AND THE BOARD CHAIR, BECAUSE THE BOARD CHAIR COMMUNICATE TO THE MEMBERS IN A WAY THAT THE CEO CANNOT.

SO THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME COMMONALITY OF VISION AND MISSION OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO AND AND TO BE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT THAT WAY.

IT ALL WORKS OUT MUCH BETTER.

AND YOU DON'T HAVE PUBLIC DISPLAYS OF DISCORD.

BUT THE CEO HAS A SORRY A HEAVY WEIGHT TO CARRY TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT THE BOARD'S WISHES ARE BEING CARRIED OUT AND TO BE RESPONSIVE TO THE BOARD WHEN QUESTIONS ARE ASKED.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YEAH, I THINK SO.

AND I GUESS THE ONLY FOLLOW UP I WOULD ASK DO DO YOU BELIEVE THAT BOARD MEMBERS OF AN INSTITUTION SUCH AS THIS HAVE A DUTY TO KEEP THE CHANCELLOR APPRIZED OF INTERACTIONS WITH STAFF? PARDON ME. YES. ANSWERS.

YES. FOR THE REASONS YOU JUST SAID.

YEAH, BECAUSE I'VE BEEN THERE.

I KNOW. EXACTLY. AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE TALKING YOUR KID OUT OF SOME WATER OUTLETS, IF YOU HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF, THEY WILL NOT BE CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS.

IT WILL BE BROADCAST IN DIFFERENT KINDS OF WAYS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CAMPUS COMMUNITY.

AND THEN THAT CREATES A CERTAIN KIND OF AFTERMATH THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH.

OH, EVERYBODY CAN TELL ME.

AND IT GOES BACK TO THE QUESTION THAT YOU JUST POSED.

AND I'VE ALWAYS HANDLED THIS BASED ON WHAT I THINK AND WITH SOME DISCRETION. I'M SURE YOU HAVE BOARDS FROM THE DIFFERENT INSTITUTION.

SOME ARE APPOINTED AND SOME ARE ELECTED.

AND WHEN YOU'RE ELECTED, YOU HAVE A CONSTITUENCY.

AND IN A PUBLIC INSTITUTION LIKE THIS, YEAH, THEY WORK FOR THE DISTRICT, BUT SOME OF THEM ARE ALSO MY CONSTITUENTS AND I THINK IT'S A MATTER OF INTEGRITY.

SOME THINGS, EVEN THOUGH I HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT AND I MIGHT ADDRESS IT IN SOME WAY, I DON'T GET INTO WHO SAID WHAT THEY SAID OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT THAT'S BASED ON WHAT I FEEL IS THE

[01:20:03]

BECAUSE BY RIGHTS, SINCE THEY ARE TAXPAYING CITIZENS OF DALLAS COUNTY, EVEN THOUGH THEY WORK FOR THE COLLEGE DISTRICT AS A TAX AND CITIZEN, I BELIEVE WHOEVER REPRESENTS THEM OWES THEM A CERTAIN LEVEL OF RESPECT AND TO USE THE BEST DISCRETION AND PUT FORTH THE BEST ETHICS AND INTEGRITY THAT THEY CAN IN DEALING WITH THAT.

SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW HOW PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT IT BECAUSE SEE, I'M NOT FIXING TO RUN AND TELL JUSTIN OR ANYBODY ELSE EVERYTHING THAT WAS SAID TO ME AND SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE RIGHT.

I'M HERE TO GIVE YOU SOME SOME ADVICE ON THIS.

GO AHEAD. I'LL LISTEN TO YOU.

OKAY. LET ME FOLLOW IT.

RIGHT. YOU'RE LISTENING TO IT. I HEARD YOU BECAUSE THAT PERSON IS AN EMPLOYEE PUTS THAT PERSON IN A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE, EVEN THOUGH YOU MAY REPRESENT THAT EMPLOYEE. SO IF YOU WANT TO BE AN ADVOCATE FOR YOUR CONSTITUENT, YOU DO THAT THROUGH THE CEO.

YOU DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO DISCLOSE THE PERSON'S NAME, BUT IT MAY BECOME OBVIOUS BECAUSE OF THE SITUATION.

BUT WHENEVER IT BECOMES APPARENT THAT IN YOUR ROLE AS A BOARD MEMBER, YOU ARE MANAGING THE THE CONCERNS OF SOMEONE WHO WORKS AT THE INSTITUTION.

IT'S GOING TO BE A PROBLEM.

SAY AGAIN WHENEVER YOU'RE USING YOUR POSITION AS A BOARD MEMBER TO ADVANCE THE CONCERNS OF SOMEONE WHO WORKS AT THE INSTITUTION.

IT'S GOING TO BE A PROBLEM AND THERE'S NO WAY AROUND IT.

WELL, SEE, YOU KNOW, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT US.

WE GOT SOME FOLKS AROUND HERE, TO BE HONEST AND EXCUSE BY A LOT OF THEM.

DON'T GIVE A DAMN IF YOU KNOW I TALK TO YOU OR NOT.

YOU KNOW, ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS YOUR RESPONSE.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THIS. BUT YOU KNOW, WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT I THINK IT'S PERSONALLY, I'VE JUST ALWAYS TAKEN IT AS A PLACE WHERE I HAVE TO BALANCE AND BE.

IT IS ABOUT WHAT I DO AND HOW I DO IT.

AND SOME THINGS.

IF IT WAS CONFIDENTIAL, WELL, THEN I'M NOT GOING TO BREAK THE COMPETITION.

YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING. YEAH, I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT.

IF THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO DO ANYTHING, IT.

IT CAN STAY COMPANY, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE THAT DON'T WANT TO HELP THEMSELVES.

WELL, IF YOU'VE GOT.

YES, THIS IT'S A FINE LINE, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ACCEPT A POSITION ON A BOARD LIKE THIS.

YOU HAVE FRIENDS, YOU HAVE CONSTITUENTS WHO WILL BRING ISSUES TO YOU.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THAT THAT THAT THAT WILL COME UP HERE.

IF I CAN GO A LITTLE FURTHER WE TALKED ABOUT YOUR IDEAL OF LEADERSHIP IS MAKING SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR ROLE YOUR DUTY HERE FIRST AS A BOARD MEMBER NOT AS IMPORTANT MEMBER WRIT LARGE, NOT INDIVIDUAL CONSTITUENTS FOR WHAT'S BEST FOR THE INSTITUTION WRIT LARGE RATHER THAN ANY INDIVIDUAL PART OF IT.

SO IF YOU KIND OF USE THAT AS A GUIDE, YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO STAY OUT OF HOT WATER BECAUSE THAT WILL GET SOMEBODY IN HOT WATER.

EVEN THE PERSON WHO MAY HAVE A CONCERN MAY FIND HIMSELF OR HERSELF IN A DIFFICULT SITUATION.

WELL, YOU KNOW, GOING ON 24 YEARS, I THINK I'VE NEGOTIATED THE WATERS PRETTY GOOD.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK IT'S ANYBODY THAT WANTS MY HEAD.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THAT.

ALL I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU IS THE GUY TO STAY.

AND WHAT I WAS SAYING, THE NUANCES OF WHAT YOU'RE DEALING WITH AND NEGOTIATOR, I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE YOU BEST PRACTICES THAT SUGGEST THAT THAT MAYBE YOU WANT TO CONSIDER HOW YOU APPROACH THAT GOING FORWARD, BECAUSE YOU MAY HAVE 100% RECORD RIGHT NOW AND ANYTHING COULD BLOW UP TOMORROW. AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE BEST PRACTICES, BECAUSE THEY'RE DESIGNED TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM HAVING SITUATIONS BLOW UP IN THEIR FACES ANYWAY. EVER HAD AN EMPLOYEE CONTACT YOU ABOUT AN INSTITUTION? ALL THE TIME, I'M SURE.

OH. HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU GET? MOST OF THE TIMES THAT INSTITUTIONS GET IN TROUBLE IS BECAUSE SOMEBODY HERE HAS AT THE INSTITUTION HAS WRITTEN US, CALLED US, AND COMPLAINED MOST OF OUR WORK, WHICH LEADS TO THOSE WHAT WE CALL THE APPEALS PROCESSES.

[01:25:09]

THEY TELL US THEN BECAUSE WE ARE RECOGNIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, WE HAVE TO FOLLOW UP ON IT.

WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE.

AND THEN, OF COURSE, INSTITUTIONS OR STATES IN SOME CASES GET MAD WITH US BECAUSE WE FOLLOW UP, BUT WE FOLLOW IT BECAUSE WE'RE OBLIGATED TO FOLLOW IT.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE WANT TO DO.

BUT YEAH, WE GET THEM ALL, I WOULD SAY ALMOST DAILY FROM SOME INSTITUTION, SOMEONE WHO WORKS THERE, EVEN BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE CEO OR OTHER BOARD MEMBERS AND THAT THEY'RE NOT FOLLOWING THE ACCREDITATION PRINCIPLES.

SO, YES, WE GET THEM VERY OFTEN.

SO YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO MAD BECAUSE THEY'LL BE WRITING TO COMPLAIN.

BUT WE ARE. WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT IT MEANS TO EMPLOY THE CBC CEO.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S COMING UP WITH THE FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY IS THAT INSTITUTIONS AND THIS AGAIN, IS PRIMARILY PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS.

SO YOU DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH TO WORRY ABOUT BECAUSE YOU HAVE MORE GUIDANCE IN THE FIDUCIARY AREA THAN MANY INSTITUTIONS.

IT'S MAKING SURE THAT THE BOARD IS AWARE OF THE FISCAL AFFAIRS OF THE INSTITUTION AND THEN IT IS ASKING THE APPROPRIATE QUESTIONS AND THAT THERE IS SOMEBODY ON THE BOARD WHO UNDERSTANDS ALL THIS FINANCIAL.

YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN LANGUAGE.

SO YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE.

DID SOMEONE SAY YOU WERE WITH FINANCE OR SOMETHING? SO GOT IT. BOYD YEAH, I THOUGHT THAT WAS SO SOMEBODY WHO READS THE STUFF AND UNDERSTANDS WHAT IT IS THAT THEY'RE SAYING TO MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTAND WHEN THE INSTITUTION MAY BE IN SOME JEOPARDY.

BUT IF SOMETHING IS GOING ON AND IT BLOWS UP AND THE QUESTION THAT THE SEC'S EEOC ORGANIZATION IS GOING TO ASK IS WHERE WAS THE BOARD? DIDN'T THEY READ THIS STUFF? DID THEY KNOW THIS WAS HAPPENING? SO THAT'S HAPPENING A LOT MORE FREQUENTLY THAN I THOUGHT IT MIGHT EVER HAPPEN.

QUESTION ON THAT. SO OUR TWO PRIMARY MEANS OF FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT ARE THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS AND THE AUDIT FUNCTION.

IS THERE ANY OTHER PROCESSES, THE BOARD'S CHARTER THAT WAS TRIGGERED BY THE SHARED RESPONSIBILITY OR SHOULD BE? I THINK GENERALLY THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.

NOW, IF YOU HAVE SOME SPECIAL PROJECTS GOING ON THAT INVOLVE LARGE SUMS OF MONEY.

I WOULD THINK YOU WOULD WANT TO HAVE SOME SOME SORT OF REVIEW OF THAT PERIODICALLY.

BUT YOU DON'T WANT AND I GUESS SOME SOME HOMEWORK FOR US.

BUT WE'RE GOING TO DO IT HERE TODAY.

YOU DON'T WANT TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE YOU'RE DABBLING IN THE OPERATIONS OF FINANCE OPERATIONS, FINANCE, FINANCIAL AFFAIRS, BUT YOU DO WANT TO GET PERIODIC REPORTS OF WHAT'S GOING ON SO YOU CAN SEE IF SOMETHING IS GOING DOWNHILL AND THE BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE ACCOUNTABLE FOR IT CAN TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION WITH THE.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? AND WE HAVE TO THE FACT THAT THE PRINCIPLES WITHIN THIS BOOK THAT ARE DESIGNED TO RELATE DIRECTLY TO THE BOARD THAT SAYS THAT THE BOARD IS A LEGAL BODY SPECIFICALLY WITH A SPECIFIC AUTHORITY OVER THE INSTITUTION.

YOU'VE GOT THAT. YOU'VE GOT THAT BY CHARTER, BY LAW.

EXERCISES FIDUCIARY OVERSIGHT OF THE INSTITUTIONS.

WE EXPECT THAT YOU'RE DOING IT.

ANYBODY THINK THAT YOU'RE NOT DOING IT? I'M NOT. ALL RIGHT.

EVERY YEAR ON THAT, RIGHT? YEAH. IN TERMS OF ALL THE NEPOTISM, CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

AND IT SHOWS.

AND THEN WE HAVE TO RECUSE OURSELVES IF WE COULD.

SOMETHING THE BOARD'S GOING TO VOTE ON COULD BENEFIT US FINANCIALLY.

GOT TO RECUSE YOURSELF.

EVERYBODY DOESN'T HAVE THAT, THOUGH.

AND WE WE HAVE ROBUST POLICY ON.

YEAH. WE CAN'T EMPLOY A FAMILY MEMBER.

THE NEPOTISM.

ANYWAY. NOW, HERE AGAIN, IT SAYS IT SHOWS THAT THAT THE BOARD CHAIR IN PARTICULAR AND THE MAJORITY OF THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

[01:30:07]

ZERO. WELL, NEITHER CAN THE BOARD MEMBERS.

WELL, HERE IN TEXAS, ACCORDING TO YOUR CHARTER, YOU CAN.

BUT AS FAR AS ACCREDITATION IS CONCERNED, STRICTLY NO CONFLICTS FOR THE BOARD CHAIR AND THE MAJORITY OF WHICH WOULD BE FOUR OF THE SEVEN CANNOT HAVE CONFLICTS BECAUSE IF YOU YOU CAN HAVE A CONFLICT AND JUST RECUSE YOURSELF.

RIGHT. BUT THE BOARD CHAIR CANNOT HAVE ANY QUERIES OR SETTLE FOR HIMSELF ON ANYTHING.

AND YOU SAID FOUR MEMBERS ARE THE ONLY THREE.

WELL, IT BECOMES YOU HAVE SEPARATE NUMBERS.

YEAH. YEAH. AT LEAST FOUR MEMBERS WOULD HAVE TO BE WITHOUT CONFLICT.

SO IF WE HAD, LIKE, FOR MEMBERS TO START RECUSING THEMSELVES, THEN WE COULD HAVE ISSUES WITH OUR CREDIT.

BUT YOU'RE SAYING. YEAH, AND I COULD.

WELL, YOU KNOW, ONE OF MY CASE STUDIES.

YEAH, THAT'S ONE OF THEM IS ABOUT.

THAT'S OKAY. SO THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST SITUATION, TEXAS LAW REQUIRES BOARD MEMBERS TO FIRST DISCLOSE AND THEN RECUSE.

AND SO IN MY OWN CASE, FOR EXAMPLE, I HAVE TWO DISCLOSED CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, ONE WITH A SOFTWARE VENDOR TO THIS DISTRICT AND ANOTHER WITH A FIRM WITH A NONPROFIT THAT I CONSULT WITH THAT MAY OR MAY NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THE DISTRICT.

THOSE ARE THOSE ARE MY TWO DISCLOSED CONFLICTS.

AND I'VE HAD TO RECUSE MYSELF MOST RECENTLY FROM A LINE ITEM ON THE BUDGET AT THE LAST MEETING RELATING TO THE TO MY EMPLOYER DESCRIBE IN ADDITION TO THOSE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS WHAT DO BOARD MEMBERS WHO HAVE CONFLICT OF INTERESTS NEED TO AVOID? WHAT ARE THE BEST PRACTICES IN THAT AREA? I MEAN, JUST NOT COMPLETE.

WHAT GUIDANCE COULD YOU OFFER US ANY BOARD MEMBER WHO HAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN ADDITION TO THOSE LEGAL COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS? THE STATE OF TEXAS, YOUR REQUIREMENTS ARE HIGHER THAN OURS, SO LONG AS IT'S HIGHER THAN OURS, IT'S FINE.

I ALWAYS JUST SAYS, IF YOU'VE GOT A CONFLICT, YOU CAN'T.

YOU MUST DISCLOSE IT AND THE BOARD MUST BE AWARE OF IT.

AND WHERE APPROPRIATE, TAKE THE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

IT MEANS RECUSE OR WHATEVER IT IS.

AND IN THAT SITUATION.

BUT THE STATE, YOUR GUIDELINES ARE HIGHER THAN THAT.

SO THAT'S NO PROBLEM.

YOU DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM. CLARIFY FOR ME.

THAT MEANS EVEN IN TERMS OF BEING CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, AS YOU WERE SAYING, THE BOARD CHAIR CAN'T HAVE ANY OF THAT.

CORRECT. NO CONFLICTS FOR THE CHAIR.

WHAT ABOUT IF THEY JUST CLOSED SOME KIDS? NO CONFLICTS, WHATEVER THEY CAN.

THEY MADE THE CHAIR STEP DOWN.

IF THE CHAIR IS GOING TO CONFLICT.

YEAH, YOU NEED THE CHAIR WITHOUT A CONFLICT.

BUT YOU'RE NOT SAYING THAT.

THAT'S NOT THE STAGE.

SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT ANY ANYBODY, ANY BOARD MEMBER THAT HAS A DECLARED CONFLICT OF INTEREST COULD EVER SERVE AS CHAIR? OR ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE BOARD MEMBER HAS TO DISCLOSE, HAS TO RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM SERVING AS CHAIR? THEY CANNOT HAVE A CONFLICT THAT THAT PORTION OF THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES IS MORE STRINGENT THAN THE RIGHT WITH RESPECT TO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. THIS BOARD IS GOVERNED BY THE STATE LAW, WHICH REQUIRES YOU TO DISCLOSE, AS YOU'VE SAID, AND TO RECUSE YOURSELF, INCLUDING THE BOARD.

IT DOESN'T MAKE AN EXCEPTION FOR BOARD CHAIR VERSUS OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.

SO I UNDERSTAND YOU'D BE SAYING, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT THE MORE STRINGENT STANDARD WOULD APPLY AND IN THIS INSTANCE, APPLYING THE STATE LAW TO TO THE DALLAS COUNTY BOARD OF TRUSTEES SATISFIES THE REQUIREMENTS OF CSC.

IS THAT RIGHT? SO THEN LET'S SAY THEY PERMIT YOU TO HAVE A CONFLICT AND DISCLOSE.

SO THE STATE LAW DOES ALLOW THAT.

TEXAS STATE LAW DOES ALLOW THE STATE WOULD ALLOW THAT.

AND WE DO NOT. AND YOU DO NOT.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE THINK YOU'RE MORE STRINGENT THAT THERE'S IS MORE ABSENCE.

SO THEN THERE'S GOVERNANCE.

YEAH. SO IN ONE CASE WHERE WE'RE MORE STRINGENT.

SO WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO? WELL, IT'S GOING TO HAVE WHAT'S THE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT IF OUR CHAIRMAN DOES.

IF I MAY, WHAT I UNDERSTAND YOU TO SAY IS THAT IF ANY MEMBER OF THIS BOARD HAS A DECLARED CONFLICT OF INTEREST, THAT PERSON CANNOT SERVE AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THIS BOARD UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE WITHOUT RISKING OUR ACCREDITATION.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THAT EXCEPT THAT I'M SAYING AT THE TIME THEY SERVE AS CHAIR, THEY COULD BE AWAY FROM THAT CONFLICT BY THE TIME THEY APPOINTED.

YOU SAID ANY MEMBER OF THIS BOARD COULD NOT SERVE IN THE FUTURE? WELL, THAT'S NOT QUITE TRUE.

AT THE TIME. THEY'RE SERVING AS CHAIR.

THEY CANNOT HAVE A CONFLICT.

OKAY. SO SOMEBODY SAY SAY TWO YEARS FROM NOW, MAYBE, MAYBE I WANT TO SERVE A CHAIR, MAYBE MY BOARD MEMBERS LOBBY SERVICE.

[01:35:07]

OR DO YOU HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THE DISTRICT? WELL, NO, NO, NO, NO. THE CHAIR CANNOT HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OF ANY TYPE.

IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN A CONTRACT.

IT COULD BE. I'M JUST.

I'M GOING TO HAVE TO EXAMINE IT.

YEAH. YEAH, I THINK WE NEED TO CLOSELY BECAUSE I'M NOT ARGUING WITH OUR PRESENTER, BUT THAT'S A VERY THAT'S A VERY HIGH BAR IN TERMS OF THE STATE LAW IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT BAR FOR PEOPLE, ANYBODY SERVING IN THE CAPACITY OF A BOARD MEMBER.

SO IF, IF THE POSITION OF S.C IS THAT YOU CAN NEVER HAVE A CONFLICT OR NEVER SERVE AS CHAIR IF YOU EVER HAVE HAD A CONFLICT.

I DIDN'T SAY THAT. BUT YOU MEAN A CURRENT CONFLICT.

I SAID THAT WOULD BE THE CASE AS IT IS.

RIGHT. AND THAT QUESTION STILL IS, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? WHAT HAPPENS? YOU'LL GET CITED.

YOU DON'T HAVE A MONITOR REPORT TO DO TO FOLLOW UP ON HOW YOU'VE ADDRESSED IT.

AND THEN SO IF YOU GO THROUGH A FOUR YEAR PERIOD WITHOUT ADDRESSING AND THEN THERE'D BE A ACTION, BUT LET'S TALK ABOUT HOW WE WOULD ADDRESS IT.

SO DANIELLE SO DISCLOSURE AND NOTIFICATION TO SACS TO SAY, YEAH, WE HAVE A BOARD CHAIR THAT HAD A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM AND DID THE TWO THINGS ABIDE BY STATE LAW.

AND SO WE HAVE COMPLIED WITH OUR PROCESS.

WE'VE COMPLIED WITH STATE LAW.

ISN'T THAT NOTIFICATION TO YOU ENOUGH TO RESOLVE THE QUESTION IF THE CONFLICT STILL EXISTS? YES. THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY SAY.

TO ME, IT SOUNDS LIKE AND I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO KNOW IF IT'S EVER COME UP BEFORE ANYONE TELL OR WHATEVER THAT THAT'S A QUESTION THAT IF YOU'RE SO AND SO THE COURT CASE, THEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING.

YEAH, I WOULD GO TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS IS THE SAME WITH ANY STANDARD, ANY STANDARD THAT WE ARE FOUND TO BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH.

IT STARTS THAT CHAIN OF WE HAVE A DEPENDING ON WHETHER IT'S A COURT REQUIREMENT OR NOT.

THERE ARE SOME STANDARDS THAT THEY CAN JUMP TO SOME MORE SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES IMMEDIATELY.

BUT FOR THIS EXAMPLE, AT A MINIMUM, WE WOULD HAVE A MONITORING REPORT.

THE EXPECTATION IS THAT DURING THAT MONITORING PERIOD, WE DEMONSTRATE HOW WE HAVE RECTIFIED THE NONCOMPLIANCE.

SO WE WOULD HAVE TO WE WOULD HAVE TO FIX IT AND DEMONSTRATE THAT WE HAVE FIXED IT.

THE CONSEQUENCE OF NOT SATISFYING THAT DURING THE MONITORING PERIOD IS AN ESCALATION KEEPS GOING UP.

SO YOU EITHER REMEDY IT OR YOU END UP IN IN A NEGATIVE ACTION AGAINST THE INSTITUTION.

SO GO AHEAD AND TAKE ME ON THROUGH THE NEGATIVE ACTION.

SO WE SO WE SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE.

SO WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO TO US? HE'S WARNING. IT GOES FROM MONITORING TO WARNING, PROBATION AND THEN EXCLUSION.

FOR HOW LONG IS IT TAKE TO GET TO PROBATION? YOU'RE GETTING TO THE POINT THAT I CAN'T MAKE.

YOU CAN WAIT IT OUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT.

YEAH, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

TWO YEARS. I SAID YOU COULD GO YOU COULD TAKE UP TO FOUR YEARS I THINK BEYOND.

YEAH. BEFORE WE START DRAWING SABERS THE THIS IS A I'VE READ THE GUIDING PRINCIPLE.

THIS IS AN ACCURATE STATEMENT ON THE SEC'S GUIDING PRINCIPLE.

SO I'M NOT TAKING I'M NOT TAKING ISSUE WITH THAT.

IF IT HAS BEEN INTERPRETED AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT HAS, IT MAY HAVE BEEN THE SUBJECT OF INTERPRETATION.

WE'LL FIND OUT WHAT THAT IS AND WE'LL GIVE YOU GUIDANCE ON WHAT THAT INTERPRETATION HAS BEEN.

BUT FOR FOR ANY ANY STANDARD THAT WE'RE FOUND TO BE NON IN NONCOMPLIANCE, OUR OBLIGATION IS TO DEMONSTRATE WITH COMPLIANCE WITH THAT STANDARD IN ORDER TO CONTINUE MEMBERSHIP.

FOR YEARS WE'VE BEEN DEPENDING IT DEPENDS ON WHAT IT IS.

SO MAXIMUM FOR YOU.

A MAXIMUM. SO WHAT SO WHAT IS THE PROCESS WHEN WHEN YOU BASICALLY FEEL AS A BODY THAT THAT'S AN INAPPROPRIATE LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE THAT YOU ALL HAVE.

BUT WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR US OR HAVING OUR BOARD REPRESENTATION SAY TO YOU ALL THAT THAT'S REALLY TOO STRINGENT? YOU'RE NOT SAYING IT TO Y'ALL, YOU'RE SAYING IT TO YOURSELVES, AND YOU'RE GOING TO GOING TO TRY TO CONVINCE YOUR COLLEAGUES AT OTHER INSTITUTIONS IN THE SOUTHERN REGION TO CHANGE THE BALANCE.

AND WHEN WAS THIS INSTITUTED, THIS PARTICULAR.

OH, THAT'S BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE AND IT WAS REAFFIRMED IN 2017.

[01:40:05]

AND WHEN THE COMMITTEE REVIEWS HOW YOU OPERATE AND THEY FIND THAT YOU'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE, THAT'S WHEN IT COMES UP WITH YOU DO THAT.

THE INTERIM REPORT IS HOW WELL THE MIDPOINT BETWEEN THE 210 YEARS.

AND IF SOMEBODY WRITES A LETTER, SOMEBODY TELLS SOMEBODY TELLS IT OR SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE OR SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE.

BUT MOST OFTEN IT'S THOSE TWO SUBJECT TO CHANGE.

WHEN YOU PUT IN A REQUEST TO CHANGE SOME SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE INSTITUTION, LIKE THE ONE WE JUST HAD TO COME IN FOR THIS INSTITUTION TO BE ABLE TO TO OFFER A BACCALAUREATE DEGREE.

THEN THERE'S A REVIEW THAT'S TRIGGERED.

AND THEN YOU HAVE TO ATTEST TO THE FACT THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH WITH THE WITH THESE PRINCIPALS.

DO WE HAVE TO REPORT TO YOU? I NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT IT.

EVERY TIME THE BOARD CHAIR OR OFFICERS CHANGE FOR A BOOK, WE DO WANT TO KNOW THE NAME OF THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD, BECAUSE COMMUNICATION, PARTICULARLY IF THE COMMUNICATION INVOLVES THE CEO, GOES ALSO TO THE BOARD CHAIR.

BUT THE ACTIONS TAKEN THROUGH THE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE THROUGH THE FIFTH YEAR REVIEW, THROUGH THE REAFFIRMATION, THE BOARD CHAIR IS COPIED ON THOSE.

YOU KNOW, THE THING THAT BOTHERS ME ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS, YOU KNOW WHAT? WHAT IS THE AUDITOR MYSELF? JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE A RULE DOESN'T MAKE THE RULE GOOD IF YOU DON'T HAVE A REASON FOR HAVING A RULE.

SO. IS THERE A HISTORY OF.

HE WOULD ONLY HAS CHAIRMAN WOULD HAVE ONE VOTE.

HE CAN'T CONTROL THE BOARD.

THERE'S SIX OTHER VOTES.

SO WHERE IS THE BASIS OF THAT THINKING? YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE BOARD CHAIR OFTEN SPEAKS FOR THE BOARD.

BUT HE CAN'T COMMIT THE BOARD.

HE WOULDN'T AROUND HERE.

HE CANNOT COMMIT WITH THE BOARD.

I CAN'T GET INTO ALL THAT.

BUT BUT TYPICALLY THAT'S THE REASON WHY, BECAUSE THE BOARD CHAIR HAS MORE INFLUENCE, BECAUSE HE HE'S THE GO TO PERSON.

HE'S THE PERSON THAT WANTS THE LOCAL TELEVISION STATION WOULD GO TO FOR A COMMENT OR APPROVING A CONTRACT WHEN HE'S COMMENTING. WELL, YOU KNOW, ONE THING THAT OCCURS TO ME ABOUT THIS, EACH STATE, THEY HAVE DIFFERENT LAWS THAT GOVERN CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND HOW THEY DEAL WITH THAT AND SO FORTH.

IS THIS ABSOLUTE OR IS IT BROAD FOR THE PURPOSE OF STAYING OUT OF WHAT'S LEGAL IN ONE STATE AND NOT LEGAL IN ANOTHER STATE? SO IN THE INTEREST OF LETTING HIM FINISH HIS PRESENTATION, WE'RE GOING TO GET OUR LEGAL COUNSEL TO RESEARCH THIS A LITTLE BIT AND WE'LL TRY AND HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION IF WE CAN GET THROUGH THIS TIME, AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT THE END, SO WE CAN FURTHER DISCUSS HOW IT DIRECTLY APPLIES TO OUR WORK.

SO THIS HAS NEVER COME UP BEFORE, YOU KNOW, AND I HAVE AS LONG AS I MAKE SURE I HAVEN'T HAD TO DECLARE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

AND I DON'T THINK OUR OUR PRIOR HAVE HAD TO WE'VE JUST BEEN WITH STATE LAW WHERE YOU HAVE TO DISCLOSE BY YOURSELF. BUT YEAH, LET'S LET'S TABLE THIS AT THIS POINT.

I KNOW YOU HAVE SEVERAL LAWYERS TO TAKE OVER.

NOT MY TIME ON THIS BOARD, BUT THAT'S OKAY.

AND WE HAVE A TRUSTEE WHO NEEDS TO LEAVE PROMPTLY.

LET ME ASK THE QUESTION, BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE TALKING, I'LL MAKE IT QUICK.

WE HAVEN'T DONE THIS IN A WHILE WITH THE ACCREDITATION AND SO FORTH.

IS THIS SOMETHING TO AND WE'VE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS TO PROHIBIT US FROM BRINGING HIM BACK TO ADDRESS WHAT WE GET TO TODAY AND WHAT WE MEANT. YEAH, AND I AM NOT HERE TO MAKE A JUDGMENT ABOUT THIS AND NOTHING HERE IS BEING RECORDED OR PLANNED FOR ANY REPORTING. THIS IS SIMPLY AN ENGAGEMENT TO GO OVER THE PRINCIPLES AS THEY RELATE TO BOARD ACTIONS.

YEAH, I DON'T THINK IT'S EVER HAS COME UP FOR US.

IT'S JUST KIND OF LIKE YOUR POINT.

PEOPLE GET UPSET WHEN THEY HAVE THESE CONCERNS AND THEY DON'T GET THROUGH.

[01:45:04]

BUT EXCEPT THAT WE DO NEED TO HAVE HIM COMPLETE THIS FOR OUR ACCREDITATION PURPOSES, SHE CAN TELL US WHAT SHE REALLY FEELS ABOUT POWERPOINTS.

IGNORE US, DON'T WANT TO IGNORE YOU, BUT I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COVER AT LEAST THE BASIS OF WHAT WE SHOULD BE FOR THIS. THE BOARD SHOULD NOT BE CONTROLLED BY A MINORITY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS OR ORGANIZATIONS OR INSTITUTIONS SEPARATE FROM IT.

THAT'S WHERE MOST OF THE ISSUES COME.

NOT NECESSARILY. I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER HAD THE ISSUE COME UP WITH WHAT WE JUST SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON ON THE BOARDS HERE.

BUT THIS IS WHERE IT USUALLY COMES, WHETHER IT'S THE ALUMNI ASSOCIATIONS OR WHETHER IT'S SOME ATHLETIC GROUP OR SOME SPECIFIC INTERESTS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY COMMUNITY OR A MAJOR DONOR THAT SAYS THAT I WANT SOMETHING TO HAPPEN, AND BECAUSE I'M A MAJOR DONOR, I'M GOING TO PULL THE MONEY AWAY.

I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT YOU.

THEN THAT BECOMES AN ISSUE BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT HIT THE PRESS AND THINGS THAT HIT THE PRESS AND ARE REPORTED TO US ARE THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW UP ON. AND THAT WOULD BE PRIMARILY HOW WE WOULD DISCOVER SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

WE WE DON'T LOOK AT THE BOARD.

THE PRESIDENT CAN'T BE THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD.

THE CHANCELLOR CANNOT BE THE CHAIR.

BELIEVE IT OR NOT, IT'S HAPPENED.

AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, I HAD A CHAIR OF THE BOARD WHO WAS ON THE FACULTY OF AN INSTITUTION.

THAT CANNOT HAPPEN.

YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS FOREIGN TO YOU, BUT THESE THINGS HAPPEN AND IT CREATES A PROBLEM WHEN THE CHAIR IS REPORTING TO THE PRESIDENT ULTIMATELY BECAUSE HE'S AN EMPLOYEE.

THAT'S THAT'S A TOUGH ONE.

IT HAS HAPPENED. THE GOVERNING BOARD ASSURES THE REVIEW OF THE MISSION.

THAT'S ONE OF THE STANDARDS THAT'S FOR POINT TO A AND MEANS THAT YOU NEED TO HAVE SOMEWHERE IN YOUR RECORDS THAT PERIODICALLY YOU LOOK AT THE MISSION.

PROBABLY AT THE OUTSET EACH ONE EACH YEAR EACH ACADEMIC YEAR THAT YOU LOOK AT THE MISSION AND HAVE SOME DOCUMENTATION OF THAT.

AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS EARLIER BETWEEN THE ADMINISTRATION AND THE THE FACULTY FUNCTIONS, THE BOARD FUNCTIONS AND THE ADMINISTRATION FUNCTIONS.

THAT'S FOUR POINT TO BE.

THESE ARE ALL FOUND IN HERE AND FURTHER EXPLANATION IN THE IN THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT.

WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THAT AS WELL.

THAT'S 4.2. AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT THAT.

YES. WHAT DO THE.

AND WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THIS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S SOMEBODY ON THE BOARD THAT YOU MAY THINK IT'S JUST HARD TO GET ALONG WITH AND YEAH, YOU COULD HAVE MUCH BETTER, SMOOTHER RUNNING BOARD MEMBERS WITHOUT THAT PERSON. AND YOU TRY TO GET RID OF THEM.

YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE A FAIR PROCESS FOR DOING IT.

YOU CAN'T JUST I MEAN, DO WE HAVE A STATE LAW OR WHAT AT THE STATE LEVEL SPEAKS TO THE EXPERIENCE? YEAH, EVERY SIX YEARS YOU'RE ALL SUBJECT TO POSSIBLY BEING REMOVED BY THE VOTERS.

BUT THE STATE LAW DOES PRESCRIBE A PROCESS WHICH HAS TO BE FOLLOWED FOR REMOVAL OF BOARD MEMBERS FROM ELECTED OFFICE CALLED IMPEACHMENT.

AND WHO INITIATES THAT PROCESS? GOODNESS. OR YOU BRING IT BACK.

THERE'S A I KNOW.

I DON'T RECALL IT. I'M JUST. YEAH.

AND I THINK HE'S LIKE CARLOS.

I MEAN, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY COULD TAKE THOSE VOTERS, YOU KNOW, THOSE TEN, TEN, LIKE TEN PEOPLE FROM SHOWING UP TO MEDIATE, TO BE REMOVED UNDER STATE LAW FOR PUBLIC INTOXICATION, REPEATED PUBLIC INTOXICATION OR ABUSE OF THEIR OFFICE FOR A VARIETY OF OTHER THINGS.

AND DON'T SHUT DOWN CONFUSING YOUR OFFICE AND YOU PROBABLY WON'T BE ABLE TO HOLD YOUR OFFICE, BUT IT'S INITIATED BY THE COMPETITION AND DUE PROCESS.

YOU CAN SEND US A SHORT BRIEF ON THAT.

YEAH, BUT MOST PEOPLE PEOPLE HAVE WHEN THEY DON'T TOUCH DOWN, WHEN THEY ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE ELECTED.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, YOU'RE GETTING SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM YOUR ATTORNEY ON THAT ONE.

YES. YES.

[01:50:01]

YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT.

ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE REMEDIES ARE TO ENSURE THAT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

THE INSTITUTION LOOKS AT THE LIST GOING BACK THERE.

YES, MA'AM. TRICIA, THERE HAVE BEEN KEY DOCUMENTS OF ACTIONS TAKEN AND PROOF THAT WHEN YOU CHANGE POLICIES TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE, THAT YOU HAVE IMPLEMENTED THOSE POLICIES.

THAT'S HOW YOU DO IT. IT'S NOT SUFFICIENT TO SAY, WELL, WE PASSED A NEW POLICY AND WE'RE NEVER GOING TO DO THAT AGAIN.

YOU HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU'VE HAD AN ACTION TO CYCLE THROUGH AND YOU'VE IMPLEMENTED THAT NEW POLICY.

THAT'S WHAT'S ACCEPTABLE TO SACHS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.

SO I'M SORRY.

OH, NO. THE ONLY THE DISTINCTION NEEDED TO BE MADE ABOUT SEX VERSUS STATE LAW.

AND WHAT WE DO AS AN ELECTED BOARD ON SOME OF THESE ISSUES AND WHAT'S PERMISSIBLE, IT'S KIND OF LIKE WHAT WE GO THROUGH, WE GET RECOGNIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER ORGANIZATION.

WE GET RECOGNIZED BY CARLESHA, WHICH IS OVER ACCREDITATION IN A BROADER SENSE, AND WE GO THROUGH A REGULATION PROCESS BY AGE.

IT'S KIND OF LIKE WHAT YOU GO THROUGH WITH THE STATE AND WITH SEX.

EEOC. I WAS THE CHIEF COUNSEL OF HIGHER EDUCATION ACCREDITATION.

IT'S BASED IN WASHINGTON AND INSTITUTIONS ARE THE MEMBERS, BUT THE ACCREDITING AGENCIES ARE MEMBERS AS WELL.

AND THEY RECOGNIZE US AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE ADHERING TO OUR OWN MISSION AND GOALS.

SO WE GO THROUGH TWO REVIEWS.

CAN YOU SEND US AN ADDITIONAL SLIDE THAT BASICALLY GIVES AN ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF SEX AND RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS? JUST A LITTLE CHART THAT WE CAN PROVIDE.

CAN YOU DESCRIBE ONE AREA THAT THE BOARD ENTRUSTS TO THE CHANCELLOR WHERE WE ARE? I THINK AS BOARD MEMBERS REGULARLY APPROACHED TO INFLUENCE IS PROCUREMENT.

SO CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT BEST PRACTICES ARE FOR BOARD MEMBERS VIS A VIS THE PROCUREMENT PROCESSES OF THE INSTITUTION? FROM OUR CREDITORS VIEW IS REALLY THAT'S ONE OF THE AREAS WHERE THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST COMES UP.

AS LONG AS YOU'RE FOLLOWING THE THINGS THAT MIGHT COME TO YOUR BUSINESS AND THE CHANCELLOR'S NOT HIRING HIS BROTHER IN LAW TO JUST PROVIDE CERTAIN KINDS OF SERVICES OR.

LET ME GIVE ANOTHER EXAMPLE.

YOU'RE NOT HIRING FOLK WHO HAVE A CONNECTION WITH SOMEBODY AT THE INSTITUTION TO PROVIDE A CERTAIN SERVICE.

THERE'S A FINANCIAL BENEFIT IF YOU FOLLOW THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST GUIDELINE AND YOU'LL TAKE CARE OF THE PIECE WITH PROCUREMENT.

BUT I THINK THAT THAT THERE ARE GUIDELINES FOR HOW PROCUREMENT BEST OPERATES, AND THAT WOULD COME THROUGH AN ORGANIZATION THROUGH MAKHUBO OR SCHOOL FOR THE SOUTHERN REGION, THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGE BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS. SO YOU WANT I WOULD RECOMMEND THEM TO IF YOU WANT TO DIG DEEPER IN TERMS OF FINDING OUT HOW TO MANAGE PROCUREMENT IN A WAY THAT KEEPS YOU OUT OF HOT WATER.

BUT TYPICALLY IT'S THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST PIECE.

YEAH. JOHN AND THE MEMBERS OF OUR TEAM, OUR FINANCE TEAM ARE ACTIVE PARTICIPANTS IN THE GLOBAL NCBA AND THEY HAVE BEEN IN LEADERSHIP ROLES OF THAT IN THE PAST.

YEAH, I THINK IT'S BROADER THAN CONFLICT OF INTEREST PERSONALLY IN WHAT I'VE OBSERVED IN OTHER PUBLIC BOARDS.

WHAT'S AN EXAMPLE? WELL, YEAH, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY'S GOING TO BAT FOR SOMEBODY THEY'RE NOT EMPLOYED WITH AND THEREFORE DON'T HAVE TO DECLARE CONFLICT, BUT A FIRM THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE ADVANCED IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE OF A PREEXISTING RELATIONSHIP.

THAT'S CONFLICT. WELL, BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY DECLARED OR RECUSAL UNDER STATE LAW, BUT IT'S ALSO NOT A BOARD DECISION.

IT'S A DECISION THAT'S MANAGED BY THIS GUY THAT BOARD MEMBERS SHOULDN'T BE MESSING WITH.

AND I DON'T THINK WE DO.

I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM IN THAT AREA, BUT I DO THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT AREA.

ON THAT POINT, YOU HAVE ON YOUR SIDE THAT WE CONSIDER AND TALK ABOUT.

[01:55:03]

BUT IT IS A CUT AS FAR AS WE'RE CONCERNED.

WE ARE CONCERNED THAT THERE WOULD BE A CONFLICT AND WOULD THEY EXPECT WE WOULD EXPECT DISCLOSURE.

THAT'S WHY THAT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE BOARD CHAIR AND AND THE CEO IS CRITICAL TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE NOT ONLY FORMAL, BUT THEY INFORMAL DISCUSSIONS, TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE KINDS OF THINGS ARE DISCUSSED AND ACTED ON APPROPRIATELY BEFORE THEY BECOME A PROBLEM.

BUT TYPICALLY, SOMEBODY KNOWS WHEN THERE'S A LIKELY CONFLICT.

THANK YOU. OH, AND HE GOES BACK TO THAT ELECTED VERSUS.

IT COULD BE A COMPANY.

THAT, ESPECIALLY YOUR CASE AND SHE GOT THAT PHONE OFF BALANCE OR WHATEVER THE COMPANY THAT'S BASICALLY ONE OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS.

IS IT PERMISSIBLE FOR YOU TO WRITE THEM RECOMMENDATION LETTER ON WHATEVER AS A RESPONSIBILITY TO THAT TAXPAYING COMPANY IN YOUR DISTRICT? I WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT OPPOSED THE BOARD.

STOP SIGNING OFF ON THOSE IMPORTANT METRICS.

I'M SURE YOU REMEMBER IT WELL.

AND THE EXAMPLE THAT I GAVE, IF WE'RE GIVING UP ONE OF OUR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITIES AND CHANCELLOR HAS, JUST AS YOU SAID IT WRONG, WE NEVER KNOW IT.

I HAVE HAD SO MANY INSTANCES IN THE EXPRESSION IN THE LAST FEW YEARS, WELL, DID YOU KNOW SUCH AND SUCH STUFF WAS WORKING ON THIS CAMPUS, YOU KNOW, OR WHATEVER? AND THE PERCEPTION AT LARGE IS THAT BECAUSE SOMEBODY WAS MARRIED TO SOMEBODY OR WHATEVER, THEY WERE GIVEN THAT JOB. BUT AS A BOARD MEMBER, I NEVER EVEN KNEW IT HAPPENED OR THAT EVEN EXISTED.

SO TO ME, YOU HAVE A VACUUM IN THAT PROCESS WHERE THE BOARD HAS NO KNOWLEDGE.

AND IF SOMEBODY SUES OR IT COMES UP AND YOU'RE TRYING TO GET REELECTED, MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO HEAR.

WELL, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS HAPPENING.

THAT, AGAIN, IS WHERE YOU FIND IT WHEN SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS REPORTED TO YOU.

THAT'S YOU REPORTED TO THE CHANCELLOR.

IF THE CHANCELLOR IS THE PRESIDENT, WHAT I'M SAYING IS GO DOWN THE.

YOU KNOW WHAT I THINK IS TOTALLY GERMANE TO THE CONVERSATION AND THE POINT THAT YOU MADE EARLIER ABOUT CONSTITUENT SERVICE TO PEOPLE WHO ALSO HAVE THE ROLE OF EMPLOYEES.

WHAT DOES CONSTITUENT SERVICE LOOK LIKE IN TERMS OF WHEN YOU HAVE VENDORS IN YOUR DISTRICT THAT ARE PARTICIPATING IN THE PROCESS? YOU DESCRIBE IT AS AS A AS A FINE LINE TO WALK AND WITH JUDGMENT AND DISCRETION, YOU KNOW, AND AND BUT ALWAYS WITH THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE INSTITUTION.

AND THAT'S GOING TO BE A VERY, I THINK, FACT SPECIFIC DETERMINATION.

IT MAKES SENSE THAT IF YOU'RE TRYING TO GET BUSINESS FROM AN ORGANIZATION, COMPANY OR WHATEVER YOU GO TO, BECAUSE I KNOW PEOPLE THAT HAVE GONE TO THEIR STATE REP TRYING TO GET BUSINESS FROM X, Y, Z COMPANY OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, WHAT CAN YOU DO? HOW CAN YOU HELP ME? YOU KNOW, WHATEVER.

AND LIKE I SAID, IF THEY REPRESENT YOU AND THEY CARRY A BIG STICK, IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO ME IF IT IS.

LET I JUST SAY THAT IT IS A STICKY WICKET.

YOU'VE ALL HEARD OF SOMETHING CALLED EARMARKS.

THAT'S THE PUBLIC ARENA OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, WHERE YOU GO TO YOUR ELECTED OFFICIAL AND EXPECT THEM TO DO SOMETHING IN YOUR FAVOR.

NOW, THE QUESTION IS, ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO DO THAT? ARE YOU REPRESENTING THE INDIVIDUAL CONSTITUENT OVER THE INTEREST OF THE INSTITUTION? AND YOU AT NIGHT? YOU'VE GOT TO BE CONCERNED WHEN YOU GO TO VISIT, YOU HAVE REPRESENTED THE INSTITUTION AS A BOARD MEMBER.

WELL, YOU KNOW, ANY TIME I'VE BEEN APPROACHED FOR HAVING BEEN A WHOLE LIFE BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS I'M HONEST TO A FAULT.

SOME FRIENDS, A FRIEND TOLD ME EVERYBODY ON THE STREET KNOWS THAT.

BUT YOU CAN'T GUARANTEE I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU DO, THAT COMPANY, ANYTHING, BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE I TELL MY KIDS ALL THE TIME, PEOPLE TELL YOU WHAT THEY WANT YOU TO KNOW.

YOU SEE WHAT THEY WANT YOU TO SEE.

[02:00:01]

I MEAN, THIS IS GOING TO ALWAYS BE A CHANCE FOR MR..

WE CAN'T PROTECT AGAINST ALL THIS, BUT WHAT WE CAN HAVE IS GUIDANCE TO TRY TO PRECLUDE IT.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE HERE.

I DON'T THINK WE CAN EVEN TELL SOMEBODY THAT YOU CAN'T.

IF WE DECIDE THAT WE WANT TO MAKE KNOW, SOMEBODY ELSE KNOWS, THERE'S ALWAYS MORE THAN ONE PERSON WHO KNOWS WHEN SOMETHING IS GOING ON.

WELL, I WOULD SAY ALL THE TIME, THAT'S THE PERSON WHO'S BENEFITED, AT LEAST THE PERSON WHO IS CAUSING THE BENEFIT TO OCCUR.

SO YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE SOME OF THIS, BUT WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IS TO HAVE CLEAR GUIDELINES THAT WOULD HELP PRECLUDE IT HAPPENING.

WE WERE TALKING EARLIER, IT GETS BACK TO INDIVIDUALS.

IF INDIVIDUALS WANT TO DO SOMETHING, THEY'RE GOING TO DO.

WHETHER THEY GET CALLED OR NOT IS ANOTHER ISSUE.

BUT WE'RE TRYING TO HAVE GUIDELINES WHICH INSTITUTIONS APPROVED TO KEEP THAT FROM HAPPENING, BECAUSE WHEN, LIKE YOU, THEY ISSUED SOMEBODY GETTING A FAVORITISM FOR A JOB, THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.

AND THAT'S PROBABLY I DON'T HAVE ANY DOCUMENT BEFORE ME, BUT IT'S PROBABLY THE BIGGEST COMPLAINT WE GET IS THAT SOMEBODY USE THEIR INFLUENCE TO GET SOMEBODY A JOB AT THE INSTITUTION.

SOMETIMES IT GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO THE GOVERNOR, TO THE GOVERNOR.

IT'S NOT EASY TO DEAL WITH BECAUSE THESE ARE ISSUES, BUT I'M SURE THE CHANCELLOR KNOWS ABOUT SOME OF THESE WERE HIGH LEVEL OFFICIALS AND BEEN THE SUBJECT OF CONCERN AT THESE KINDS OF ISSUES.

ALL RIGHT. I KNOW I PROMISED I'D BE OUT HERE AND OUT OF YOUR HAIR, SO I'M GOING TO TRY TO DO THAT.

WE JUST GOT THROUGH THE SLIDES.

YES, MA'AM. IT'S NOT THAT SHE'S GOING.

ALL RIGHT. SINCE YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH THEM.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? 4.2, JEANNE.

THAT'S FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

SOME INSTITUTIONS HAVE TWO GOVERNING BOARDS, ONE AT THE AT THE STATE LEVEL AND ONE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.

IN THOSE CASES, THESE ISSUES HAVE TO BE DISCUSSED.

AGAIN, THE INSTITUTION'S MAIN MISSION OF FISCAL STABILITY AS IT RELATES TO WHICHEVER BOARD HAS HAS THE THE THE SOLE NOT THE SOLE, BUT THE THE MAJORITY OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE INSTITUTION.

THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE BEFORE US AS PEOPLE IN HIGHER EDUCATION THAT WE OPERATE OUR INSTITUTIONS.

BUT IN THE CENTER OF IT IS STUDENT SUCCESS.

THAT'S THAT IS WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT.

A QUICK QUESTION. LET'S THE GO BACK, IF YOU COULD, AS A PERSON, BECAUSE WHEN WE WERE WHEN THIS BOARD HAD OVERSIGHT OVER SEVEN SEPARATELY ACCREDITED COLLEGES, WE WERE IN THE BOTTOM QUARTILE IN TERMS OF HOW THE STATE OF TEXAS ASSESSES THOSE THINGS ON YOUR SIDE.

AND AND WE WEREN'T SERVING THAT.

AND THAT WAS THE MOTIVATION TO SEEK ACCREDITATION AS ONE COLLEGE.

IT'S ACTUALLY EVER CONSIDERED REVOKING ACCREDITATION FOR ANY ONE OF OUR SEVEN SEPARATE COLLEGES.

AND UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD YOU LOOK AT THESE THINGS AND DO SO? ANY OF THESE THINGS THAT WE LISTED ON THAT WE LIST UNDER HERE THAT THAT THE INSTITUTION IS NOT PERFORMING WELL.

IF ONE OF THE THINGS ON THE STUDENT SUCCESS, FOR EXAMPLE, WE ASK INSTITUTIONS TO DETERMINE WHAT THEIR PEER INSTITUTIONS ARE.

AND WE RATHER THAN TO COME UP WITH A HARD AND FAST PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS THAT YOU SHOULD GRADUATE EACH YEAR OR SHOULD FINISH CERTAIN CURRICULUM PROGRAMS OR CERTIFICATE PROGRAMS THAT YOU WOULD COMPARE YOURSELF TO YOUR PEERS AND ESTABLISH WHAT YOU THOUGHT IT WAS THAT YOU SHOULD BE DOING.

AND THEY CAN SAY, I CAN TELL YOU ABOUT THAT.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT STUDENT SUCCESS.

ARE YOU, IN FACT, FINISHING THE THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS THAT THAT YOU DECIDED YOU ARE?

[02:05:03]

AND AND THEY EVALUATE INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE.

AND FOR YEARS WE WERE IN THE BOTTOM QUARTILE WITH OUR SEVEN SEPARATELY ACCREDITED CAMPUSES.

WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING IS THAT WAS OF NO IMPACT IN TERMS OF SEXY ACCREDITATION AND NUMBERS AND THAT OUR ACCREDITATION WAS NEVER AT RISK, EVEN THOUGH IN THESE AREAS THAT YOU'VE IDENTIFIED IN YOUR SLIDE, WE WERE NOT PERFORMING.

NO, BECAUSE WE ACCREDIT INSTITUTIONS.

IF THIS INSTITUTION USED THAT DATA FOR TO MAKE THEIR CASE, THEN YOU PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN CITED.

BUT I'M SURE THEY DIDN'T USE THAT DATA.

WHAT DO YOU PUT OUT WHAT YOU DID COMMENT ON THIS? YEAH. SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT HISTORICALLY THE SEVEN WERE PERHAPS SOMETIMES IN SOME OF THESE INSTANCES SHOOTING FROM THE FLOOR AND THAT WAS OKAY FROM THE SACS PERSPECTIVE, THAT WAS PERMISSIBLE FROM THE SACS PERSPECTIVE.

AND SO WE DIDN'T WRITE IT INTO OUR EXPECTATIONS NECESSARILY BEING HIGHER THAN WHAT WE HAVE DECIDED WOULD BE HIGHER NOW ACHIEVE HIGHER LEVELS THAN ANYTHING ELSE DOES IT DOES THAT THAT'S HERE.

SO GETTING WARMER SO SOME OF THE SPECIFIC STANDARDS AROUND THE WAY THAT STANDARD EIGHT WAS RE ARTICULATED AND AS YOU SAID THE INSTITUTIONS WERE CHARGED WITH SETTING WHAT ARE OUR GOALS, WHAT ARE WHAT WHAT RATES ARE APPROPRIATE FOR OUR INSTITUTION AND OUR OUR INSTITUTION TYPE AND MISSION.

AND WE'RE THE WAY THAT WE WERE IN OUR CYCLE.

WE HAD NOT YET HAD TO HAVE A FULL REVIEW OF THAT.

SO IF WE HAD STAYED SEVEN SEPARATE COLLEGES RIGHT NOW, WE WOULD BE DRAFTING WE ACTUALLY WOULD BE HOSTING PROBABLY OUR OUR OUR ON CAMPUS VISITS FOR REAFFIRMATION.

AND THEY WOULD HAVE JUST THIS PAST SPRING, TAKEN A LOOK AT WHAT WHAT OUR REPORTS ARE.

SO BASICALLY THE TIMING OF WHEN THOSE STANDARDS WERE ARTICULATED THAT WAY AND WHEN WE HAVE A FULL REVIEW OF THEM, WE HAVE THEY HAVEN'T HE HASN'T REVIEWED THEM YET.

I'M ACTUALLY LOOKING BACKWARD TO PRE CONSOLIDATION PROCESS.

HERE'S THE HERE'S WHAT I'M REALLY TRYING TO GET AT.

YEAH. WHERE IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY IN SAXTON FOR THESE STANDARDS? AND BECAUSE IF OUR SEVEN SEPARATE CAMPUSES WERE FAILING ON THESE STUDENTS ACCESS POINTS AND WE WERE AS MEASURED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS AND IS PRESENTED TO US BY OUR CHANCELLOR, DOES ACTUALLY NOT GIVE ANY CONSIDERATION TO THAT.

HAVE YOU EVER HAS ACTUALLY EVER REVOKED AN INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION BECAUSE OF THE FAILURE ON STUDENT SUCCESS AT THE STATE LEVEL? NO, AT THE INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL, IF IS NOT REPORTED TO US, WE DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION TO ACT.

WE WILL NOT ACT UPON WHAT GCB DOES ROUTINELY UNLESS IT CAME THROUGH THE INSTITUTION.

RIGHT. SO, SO, SO IT'S TRUST.

IT'S SELF. IF I'VE GOT IF I'VE GOT A IF I'M NOT PERFORMING INSTITUTION, IF I DON'T REPORT IT, YOU'LL NEVER KNOW.

AND THAT'S NOT COMPLETELY ACCURATE BECAUSE THERE ARE OTHER REPORTS THAT THAT WILL REFLECT WHAT YOUR METRICS ARE.

IT'S A PROCESS OF OF SELF STUDY, SELF REPORT AND PEER REVIEW.

SO WHEN WE WHEN WE WOULD WRITE THAT REPORT AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT OUR WHAT OUR STANDARDS ARE, THESE ARE WE WOULD USE WHATEVER DATA WE.

THAT'S APPROPRIATE TO MAKE THE CASE FOR COMPLIANCE.

AND OUR PEER REVIEW WOULD LOOK AT THAT AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE WERE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPECIFIC STANDARD OR NOT.

BUT THE CAC DOESN'T TAKE ANY REPORTS FROM ANY OTHER EXTERNAL AGENCIES BY THEMSELVES AS ACTIONABLE.

SO THEY'RE EVALUATING WHATEVER WE REPORT AND THEY TRUST US.

OUR PEERS, OUR PEERS COME WHO ARE HELD TO THE SAME STANDARDS AND ARE EVALUATING IF WHAT WE SAID IS ACCURATE.

THE FIRST PRINCIPLE OF INTEGRITY IS THEIR FIRST, THE FIRST CONSIDERATION.

SO THEY'RE ASKING THEMSELVES, DID THE REPORT THAT DALLAS COLLEGE SUBMITTED, IS THAT AN REPORT OF INTEGRITY IS WHAT THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO, WHAT THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE IN PRACTICE OR NOT.

AND THEY IT'S THE ENTIRE GROUP HAS ARTICULATED THESE STANDARDS AND ARE HELD TO THOSE SAME STANDARDS.

SO IT'S UP TO THOSE THOSE PEERS TO DECIDE IF WHAT WE HAVE REPORTED IS ACCURATE OR NOT.

THANK YOU. NOW, I SENSE THAT YOU STILL GOT A QUESTION.

NO, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND ACCOUNTABILITY IN THIS PROCESS FOR THE STANDARDS THAT SANTE PURPORTS TO HOLD ITS INSTITUTIONS TO.

SO SO WHAT WHAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE GETTING AT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION HAS MORE THAN ONCE PROPOSED AN ACROSS THE BOARD

[02:10:03]

AND ONE OF THE ADVANTAGES OF THE PEER REVIEW ACCREDITATION PROCESS IS THAT WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY IT'S NOT WE DON'T THINK IT'S IN THE BALLPARK. IT'S NOT JUST FAIR, BUT IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO HOLD A COMMUNITY COLLEGE TO THE SAME GRADUATION STANDARD OF A MEDICAL SCHOOL, FOR EXAMPLE, COMPLETELY DIFFERENT MISSIONS, COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ADMISSIONS STANDARDS TO WHOLE ENTIRE DIFFERENT EXPECTATION THAT YOU WOULD HAVE FOR COMPLETION, FOR EXAMPLE.

SO IT'S THROUGH THIS PEER REVIEW PROCESS THAT WE HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY AND OBLIGATION TO OUR PEERS TO SAY, ARE WE MEETING THIS THIS STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT STANDARD IN ITS SPECIFICITY IN A WAY THAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR OUR INSTITUTION TYPE AND OUR MISSION? AND IT'S FOR OUR PEERS TO SAY WE ARE, WE AREN'T.

SO THE ALTERNATIVE OF THAT PROCESS IS THAT WE COULD GET HANDED A STANDARD THAT IS THAT WOULD PRECLUDE OUR STUDENT BODY FROM BEING ABLE TO ACCESS HIGHER EDUCATION, BECAUSE THEY WOULD SAY, OH, COMMUNITY COLLEGES AREN'T PERFORMING HIGH ENOUGH.

WE DON'T NEED THOSE ANY LONGER.

THERE'S CERTAINLY SOME FOLKS WHO WOULD LIKE TO SEE I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN.

SO THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO ARTICULATE WHAT WHAT OUR WHAT STANDARD WE'RE HOLDING OURSELVES TO.

AND I WOULD SAY THAT THAT STANDARD AND THAT CONVERSATION AT DALLAS COLLEGE IS WE'RE HAVING THAT CONVERSATION COMPREHENSIVELY FOR THE FIRST TIME, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE REFLECTED IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN WHERE THERE WILL BE ONE YEAR, THREE OR FIVE YEAR TARGETS FOR ALL THAT, THESE METRICS OF STUDENT SUCCESS. AND WE'RE GOING TO BE HOLDING OURSELVES TO THAT STANDARD INTERNALLY, BUT THAT'S ALSO OUR PLANNING AND INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS AND ALL THE STUFF THAT THEN GETS REPORTED TO SACS DOC AND THEN THEY GET TO DECIDE BY PEER REVIEW, DID WE FOLLOW WHAT WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO? DO WE HAVE COMPREHENSIVE PROCESSES FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AT DALLAS COLLEGE? WERE NOT. SO EVEN IF WE FALL SHORT OF THAT TARGET, ARE WE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT WE ARE ACTIVELY PURSUING THAT TARGET AND AND TRYING TO BE BETTER THAN WE WERE, NOT JUST AS SEVEN SEPARATE COLLEGES, BUT WHERE WE WERE DALLAS COLLEGE TWO YEARS AGO, I THINK IS VERY HELPFUL.

AND I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING, IN ADDITION TO ALL THAT SHE SAID, IS THERE'S STILL MOVEMENT ON THE WAY TO HAVE ONE MEASURE WHICH WOULD BE REALLY DIFFICULT TO MEASURE, SAY, DALLAS COLLEGE AGAINST RICE UNIVERSITY, AND EXPECT THEM TO HAVE THE SAME OUTCOMES WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE THE SAME INPUTS.

SO THERE IS SOME MERIT IN HAVING A PEER REVIEW THAT IS NOT GUIDED BY SOME EXTERNAL REVIEW PROCESS.

I THINK IT'S IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE INSTITUTIONS AND IN THE BEST INTEREST OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

I AM. I AM AT THE END OF THE TIME THAT I HAD, I THINK I SHOULD PUT THIS THE THINGS I'M GOING TO LEAVE WITH YOU, WHICH I THINK WOULD HAVE BEEN A LITTLE MORE EXCITING THAN MY TALKING. BUT I'M GOING TO LEAVE THEM WITH YOU AS SOME SCENARIOS.

AND BASED ON WHAT HAS HAPPENED WAS I HAD INTENDED TO BREAK THIS UP AND HAVE YOU GO THROUGH THIS.

BUT I THINK TIME IS THE KEY TO THIS.

I MEAN, YEAH, IF YOU LEAVE BEHIND THE HOMEWORK PROBLEM, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GOT YOUR CARD, TOO.

OKAY. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY.

I TRIED. I THOUGHT I CAN'T REMEMBER, BUT WE DID.

AND HERE'S ANOTHER ONE CONCERNING GREAT MINDS GOING, AND I'M GOING TO GIVE THIS TO YOU AS WELL.

SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT TODAY HAPPENED AT GREAT MINDS UNIVERSITY.

NOW, SOME OF THESE THINGS MAY SEEM ABSURD, BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT EVERYTHING YOU READ THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED AT AN INSTITUTION.

WHY DID YOU ALL MAINTAIN A RELATIONSHIP WITH CCP? AND WHAT IS SHE SAYING? YEAH. YEAH. AND HERE'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK, IF YOU WILL.

THIS IS CALLED WHAT KEEPS YOU UP AT NIGHT.

FOR WHAT? IT COMES THROUGH AGP, WHICH IS THE ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNING BOARD, WHICH IS A RESOURCE THAT YOU PROBABLY HAVE ACCESS TO AS WELL.

BUT I THINK YOU'D BE INTERESTED TO READ THIS AS WELL.

OKAY. YEAH.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BOARD RETREAT EITHER IN NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER, SO MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING TO HER COMMENT.

[02:15:08]

THANK YOU. AND THANKS TO THE BOARD FOR YOUR QUESTIONS AND ENGAGING IN THIS CONVERSATION.

YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IT'S IMPORTANT TO THE WORK THAT WE DO.

AND SO THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO SHARE THEM.

AND IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT, PARTICULARLY AFTER YOU GET YOUR LEGAL REVIEW ABOUT THE ABOUT THAT ISSUE, REACH OUT? OR HAVE YOU COME BACK TO ME ABOUT THOSE THINGS YOU ARE GOING TO DO IN NOVEMBER? RIGHT. IT WOULD BE GOOD IF WE HAD ACCESS TO THIS.

OH, FOR SURE. WELL, WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION NOW.

YES. JUST A QUICK ONE.

QUICK ONE TO ANSWER SPECIFIC TO THESE ISSUES THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF CONVERSATION AND THERAPY MEETINGS.

I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING THIS MUCH I DON'T KNOW.

THERE WAS TWO STACKS OF BOOKS ON THE BACK OF THE ROOM BACK THERE.

YEAH. I THINK FOR US OR FOR US THERE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

[5. Executive Session]

OUR AUDIT.

YES. IT IS FOR QUITE A WHILE.

SO WE'RE READY. YOU'RE GOOD.

IT IS NOW 1:12 P.M.

TODAY'S WORK SESSION IS NOW ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR JOINING US.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.