Minn. R. agency 188, ch. 8705, pt. 8705.1100
Current through Register Vol. 49, No. 20, November 12, 2024
Part 8705.1100 - UNIT APPROVALSubpart. 1. [See repealer.]Subp. 1a.Initial unit approval.A provider must apply for initial unit approval under the procedures in this subpart.
A. The provider must submit a notice of intent to apply for initial unit approval.B. Within one month of the receipt of the notice of intent, board staff must schedule an informational meeting with the provider to review the approval process and jointly agree upon dates for the site visit.C. At least 12 months prior to the site visit, the provider must provide a self-study, including evidence demonstrating compliance with standards, for review.D. At least one month prior to the site visit, the provider must submit an interview schedule to board staff.E. The review team must review the submitted self-study and supplemental evidence and provide feedback on deficiencies at least six months prior to the site visit.F. The provider may provide a supplemental narrative and additional evidence to address deficit areas at least one month prior to the site visit and may not provide additional evidence after this time.G. The review team must conduct a site visit to verify evidence of current compliance with the standards in this chapter, report their findings, and make a recommendation to the board regarding approval status of the unit.H. Within the written report of findings and recommendations, the review team must identify each standard under part 8705.1010, as: (1) Met: when the substance of a standard is evidenced through narrative, supplemental evidence, and interviews;(2) Met with Concern: when the substance of a standard is evidenced through narrative, supplemental evidence, or interviews, but the review team is concerned about ongoing compliance with the relevant standards. The review team must provide a comment on each standard that is "Met with Concern";(3) Met as Planned: when the substance of a standard is currently not met, but clear and convincing evidence of plans to meet the standard prior to enrolling candidates is provided; or(4) Not Met: when compliance with all or part of a standard is not demonstrated. I. Within one month of the site visit, board staff must provide the written report of findings and recommendations to the unit leader. Within one month of receipt of the review team's report and recommendations, the provider may respond to factual errors. Subp. 1b.Board determinations for initial approval.The board must take one of the following actions based upon the review team's written report of findings and recommendations.
A. The board may grant initial unit approval for a duration of two years to newly approved program providers to launch approved licensure programs and begin collecting candidate and program data. The board may require the unit to submit an interim report during the approval period to demonstrate compliance with standards identified as "Met as Planned" and "Not Met" in the review team's written report. (1) Upon written request by the unit, initial unit approval may be extended for an additional two years.(2) A unit with initial unit approval may seek continuing approval by submitting a self-study once the unit has launched one or more approved programs for at least 24 months. A review team must conduct a site visit to verify evidence of compliance with the standards in this chapter, report the findings, and make a recommendation to the board regarding continuing approval status. The review team must identify each standard according to the procedures in part 8705.1100, subpart 1a, item H.B. The board may grant conditional unit approval for a duration not to exceed two years when the nature and severity of "Not Met" standards threaten the viability of the unit to prepare candidates for licensure. The board must identify standards that must be met in order for the unit to achieve initial approval pursuant to item A. A unit with conditional approval may not submit requests for initial program approval (RIPA). If the unit has already submitted one or more RIPA, the review process must be paused until the unit is granted initial approval pursuant to item A. A unit with conditional approval may not enroll candidates. (1) Prior to the expiration of the unit's conditional approval, the unit must evidence meeting the identified standards, which must be reviewed at a focused site visit specific to those standards.(2) If, after two years of conditional approval, standards remain unmet, the board must act to disapprove the unit and discontinue its programs.C. The board must deny unit approval when the provider's failure to meet the requirements and standards in this chapter, chapter 8710, or Minnesota Statutes, chapter 122A, results in an inability to prepare candidates for licensure. The denial action must state the reasons for the denial. The provider may not enroll candidates. The provider may resubmit a notice of intent to apply for unit approval when at least six months have passed since the date of the denial action.
Subp. 2. [Renumbered subp 1b]Subp. 2a.Continuing unit approval.A. Continuing approval is valid for six years. A unit must apply for continuing unit approval to continue to provide teacher preparation programs to candidates by scheduling an informational meeting with board staff, jointly agreeing upon the dates for a site visit, and following the procedures under subpart 1a, items C to F.B. The review team must conduct a site visit to verify evidence of compliance with the standards in this chapter, report their findings, and make a recommendation to the board regarding the approval status of the unit. Within the written report of findings and recommendations, the review team members must identify each standard under part 8705.1010 as: (1) Met: when the substance of a standard is evidenced through narrative, supplemental evidence, and interviews;(2) Met with Concern: when the substance of a standard is evidenced through narrative, supplemental evidence, or interviews, but the review team is concerned about ongoing compliance with the relevant standards. The review team must provide a comment for each standard that is "Met with Concern"; or(3) Not Met: when all or part of a standard is not evidenced through narrative, supplemental evidence, and interviews.C. Within one month of the site visit, board staff must provide the written report of findings and recommendations to the unit leader. Within one month of receipt of the review team's report and recommendations, the provider may respond to factual errors. Subp. 2b.Board determinations for continuing approval.The board must take one of the actions in items A to D based upon the review team's written report of findings and recommendations.
A. The board must grant continuing approval for a period of six years when the unit demonstrates that the standards in part 8705.1010 are "Met" or "Met with Concern."B. The board must grant continuing approval with focus areas for a period of six years when one or more of the standards in part 8705.1010 are "Not Met."C. The board must place a unit on probation for a duration not to exceed two years when the nature and severity of "Not Met" standards threaten the viability of the unit to prepare candidates for licensure. The unit is identified as "low performing" for Federal Title II reporting. (1) A unit on probation may not enroll new candidates.(2) A unit on probation may not submit a request for initial program approval (RIPA) for new programs. If a unit has already submitted one or more RIPA, the review process must be paused until the unit is granted continuing approval or continuing approval with focus areas.(3) When placing a unit on probation, the board must identify standards that must be met in order for the unit to achieve continuing approval or continuing approval with focus areas. Prior to the expiration of the probationary status, the unit must evidence meeting the identified standards, which must be reviewed at a site visit specific to those standards. If standards remain "Not Met" after two years of probation, the board must act to disapprove the unit and discontinue its programs.D. The board must disapprove a unit when the unit's failure to meet the requirements and standards in this chapter, chapter 8710, or Minnesota Statutes, chapter 122A, results in an inability to prepare candidates for licensure. The disapproval action must state the reasons for disapproval and provide a plan for candidates currently enrolled to complete the licensure programs by a specified date. A provider may not reapply for unit or program approval until at least two years have passed since the date of the disapproval action. Subp. 6.Unit review teams and expenses.A. The review team for site visits must be comprised of at least three representatives for units and two reviewers for restricted units. The review team may include active or former teacher educators, active or former teachers, and active or former school administrators. The unit leader must provide input to board staff regarding the review team membership. If agreement is not reached, or if input is not provided, the board staff shall appoint the review team members.B. Expenses of the review team members shall be reimbursed by the Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board as permitted under state law or rule. Other incidental expenses incurred by the provider, such as those related to preparing reports, arranging meetings, and providing workrooms, supplies, and hospitality for the review team while on site are the responsibility of the provider.Minn. R. agency 188, ch. 8705, pt. 8705.1100