ED Announces New Negotiated Rulemaking Effort
September 10, 2009
Changes to Title IV regulations on program integrity and foreign schools will be considered by two negotiated rulemaking panels this fall, according to a notice from the Department of Education inviting nominations for representatives. The deadline for nominations is September 25.
Team I will consider program integrity issues, including incentive compensation, definition of credit hour, misrepresentation of information provided to students and prospective students, agreements between institutions, term-based module programs, and timeliness and disbursement of Title IV funds. NACUBO intends to nominate representatives to serve on this committee.
ED notes that while it agrees that changes to the financial responsibility standards may be beneficial, significant analysis must be done before ED will be ready to bring the issue to the negotiating table. As a result, the agenda for Team I will not include financial responsibility. NACUBO submitted testimony in June raising the issue, and staff has met with ED officials to discuss these efforts.
Team II will address issues related to participation in the guaranteed loan programs by foreign institutions, including financial statements, compliance audits, nonprofit status, and financial responsibility for public institutions.
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
- ED Proposes Substantial Expansion of Financial Responsibility Indicators
- Supreme Court Hands Down Two Decisions with Higher Education Implications
- NACUBO Objects to Annual SFA Audits
- 2016 CAO and CBO Collaborations
August 1-2, 2016
- 2016 Planning and Budgeting Forum
September 19-20, 2016
- 2016 Managerial Analysis and Decision Support
November 17-18, 2016
- ON-DEMAND: The CBO's Role in Diversity and Inclusion on Campus
- ON-DEMAND: The Clery Act: Strategic Planning to Mitigate Institutional Risk
- ON-DEMAND: Title IX: Key Issues Surrounding Institutional Compliance
- ON-DEMAND: NACUBO Live! Higher Education Accounting Forum
- ON-DEMAND: Responsibility Center Management: Two Different Perspectives