Subject: Fwd: some fina l thoughts - negotiated rule making on gainful employment 

From: Chip Cameron 

Sent: 9/7/2013 3:53 PM 

To: Kolotos, John; Rory O'sullivan; Eileen Connor; Whitney Barkley; M arga ret Reiter; Tom Tarantino; Kevin Jensen; Mohr, 

Rhonda (rmohr@ ); Warner, Jack; Sandra Kinney; Ted Daywalt; tkriger@ ; Helga Greenfield; 

rhiggs@ ; Richard Heath; Glen Gabert; Nassirian, Barmak; barbara.hoblitzell@ ; Jenny Rickard; 

tdalton@ .edu; Brian Jones; Raymond Testa; Marc Jerome; JBerkowitz@ ; Belle Wheelan 

Privat e; nharvison@

Cc: charlie pou; M acias, Wendy 

Subject: Fwd: some final thoughts - negotiated rule making on ga inful em ployment 

Ideas from Della Justice and Libby DeBlasio (St ate attorney generals community of interest) for your consideration next 

week. 

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Justice, Della (KYOAG) < @ > 

Dat e: Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 10:33 PM 

Subject: RE: some final thoughts - negotiat ed rule making on ga inful employment 

To: Chip Cameron < @ > 

Cc: Libby.DeBiasio@

Dear Mr. Cameron, 

Per your request, we are providing the following ideas and questions for the Department's preparation for the 

negotiations next week. 

I. JOB PLACEMENT. 

The rate at which students actually obtain jobs in the career studied seems a logical and necessa ry factor for 

det ermining whether the program is preparing students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation. Like the 

debt measures, job placement rates should be a ga inful employment metri c. The Department already requires short 

programs to demonstrate a job placement rate of 70%, but no such standard has been set with respect to other gainful 

employment programs. Institutions should demonstrate compliance with a job placement standard set by the 

Department and pass the other metrics in order to reta in eligibility. 

Further, consumers rely on job placement rates when deciding whether the program will lead to a better paying job. 

Yet, at this time the Department only requires schools to disclose job placement rates if they are required to ca lculate a 

rat e by the accreditor/state authority. Because different methods of ca lculation are employed and beca use some 

accreditors/states do not require the ca lculation of a job placement rate, the disclosure is not as useful and meaningful 

at it needs to be. 

While institutions must still be required to comply with state law req uirements for ca lculating job placement rates, the 

Attorney General negotiators urge the Department to esta blish a uniform standard for calculating job placement rates 

and establish a minimum rate to be used as a metric for determining ga inful employment. The Department should also 

require use of the uniform standard for reporting and for the required consumer disclosure. 

1 
After reviewing the different ways in which job placement has been defined by some of the larger accreditors and 

government agencies, we have drafted a definition of job placement that combines different parts of t hose definitions 

to devise a definition that may be suitable for these purposes. This is not an attempt to comprehensively address all 

aspects of a job placement regulation and the definition is being provided only as a st arting point to begin discussion. 

We may provide additional and different ideas and language during the course of negotiations. 

For these purposes, we propose the following definition: 

Job Placement means within 180 days of completion/graduation the student has been employed for at least 13 weeks 

with the employer in a full-time paid position in the field or related field of study. In field of study/relat ed field of study 

means employment is--

(1) Included in the list of job titles for the program published by the institution and included in the list of Classification of 

Instructional Program (CIP) job titles on O*N ET crosswalk for which the programs were approved by the Departm ent; or 

(2) In a position where the routine work predominantly requires using the core skills and knowledge expected to have 

been taught in the program and the position requires education beyond high school level; or 

(3) In instances where completers/ graduat es are continuing in prior employment, the prior employment must be 

reasonably related to t he program training and the completer/graduate attest s in his/her own handwriting at the time 

of enrolling in the program and upon completion of the program, with reference to a specific written policy of the 

employer, to the benefit of the training as a cat alyst for maintaining or advancing in a position. 

For part-time employment to be considered as placement, there must be a handwritten statement from the 

graduate/completer at time of completion that part-time employment is his/her objective for employment including a 

general explanation for such objective. 

The job placement rates must be subject to regular audits by an independent entity or the Department. With respect to 

#1 above, we have presumed that the CIP and O*Net crosswalk provides a list of job titles certified by the Department as 

a recognized occupation for the particular program. If this is not the case, then a reference to the appropriate list 

certified by the Department would need to be substituted. If there is no such list, then #1 could not be a basis for 

placement and the employment must meet the requirements of #2. Therefore, could the Department confirm if there is 

a list of job titles which the Department has certified as recognized occupations for the program s of study? 

Also, can the Department describe what information and methods are used to ensure that the short programs comply 

with the job placement rate of 70%? 

II. EVIDENCE THAT PROGRAM WILL LEAD TO GAIN FUL EM PLOYM ENT PRIOR TO APPROVAL. 

Additionally, we would like to ask the Department what regulations or requirements are in place to ensure that 

institutions comply with 34 CFR 668.14, the Program Participation Agreement, which requires the institution to agree 

that it will"establish the need for the training of the student to obtain employment in the recognized occupation for 

which the program prepares the student." Also, more generally what regulations or requirements are in place to ensure 

that prior to the program being approved there has been an assessment that that the program will prepare students for 

gainful employment in a recognized occupation? The matter of programs being evaluated prior to approval was raised 

in the written comments submitted by Kentucky Office of Attorney General on June 4, 2013. 

Thank you for the opportunity to rai se these issues prior to the negotiations. 

Della Justice and Libby DeBlasio 

2