by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, IECA

Recently I came across a comment on a blog where someone expressed an implied criticism of IECA. The criticism was that the Independent Educational Consultants Association does not focus its energies exclusively in school selection, application, and admission. The criticism actually kept me up all night—quite a feat for those who know me—yet I tossed and turned. But not for the reasons you may think. I’m certainly not thin-skinned, and so I can take any criticism. In this case I was restless because I was confounded. How could someone have written those words believing them to be critical, when to me they express the very difference that makes IECA and its members so uniquely qualified? Critical? No—to me it was the ultimate praise.

How can one even imagine preparing to send students away for school, but not understand issues like adolescent depression or anxiety? Should we apologize for bringing in the top experts in the country to present about the latest developments in research on brain theory, gender differences, attachment, and the impact of adoption? We know full well how such things impact the ability to succeed both in class and with peers. Should we not support our members who wish to do career exploration or employ the dynamic information gained in Myers-Briggs Type Indicator?

Some of the criticism, I suspect, was related to some of the topics at IECA conferences. Does the person offering the critique believe that those assisting in college or school admission should confine their discussion to majors, Greek life, financial aid and ‘where you can get in?’ All that should be noted, but every single person working with adolescents, if they wish to be taken as a true professional, should gain some understanding of some growing trends of concern: Internet and gaming addictions (the numbers of kids who land in a dorm room and play World of Warcraft or other games 24 hours a day, skipping class, is scary!), abuse of prescription drugs (a growing campus trend), campus bullying (using social media), eating and body-perception disorders, and so much more.

It seems that some think college admission can be accomplished using a chart: standardized test scores in column A, GPA in column B, activities in column C, and voila…”Here’s your list of schools, Sally!” Let’s remember that adolescents are not a simple commodity where we plug in the proper numbers and out pops the result. IECA’s strength comes from our realization—make that commitment—to seeing every child as an individual, with abilities and weaknesses, emotional strengths and scars, unique talents, and needs. Yes, this is indeed what makes IECA unique, and more importantly, what makes our members uniquely qualified to really serve the best interests, the true needs of every child.

That anyone can think otherwise, will keep me up at nights.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, Independent Educational Consultants Association

The attendees at the IECA Summer Training Institute found themselves facing a series of ethical conundrums this morning. Drawn from actual cases from IECA’s files, the participants had to look inward to ensure they practice using ethical and professional approaches.

One case explored the need to meet obligations to schools and programs sponsoring campus tours and events.  Another examined the appropriateness of consultants hosting events for client families and admission representatives.  With IECA maintaining the strictest standards (which forbid actions that heighten student and parent anxiety), one case examined a consultant who uses fear, anxiety and pressure at community gatherings to get parents to ‘sign up.’  Further, she promises to use her “secrets” to assure success.  Consultants saw the ethical violation and pledged to only work for good matches and assure families that “great colleges exist for every student.”

The attendees also explored the interactions among consultants.  They read a case dealing with the obligations a consultant has to professional colleagues, and interactions via the IECA TalkList.  This created spirited conversation as members balance the need to share evidence of their research and effort with the need to protect clients’ privacy.

Ethics was presented throughout the weeklong training as the topic was worked in to every instructional session.  This morning, as the STI examined the growth of ‘new media’ and social networking, the ethics of using such technologies and linking with student clients was examined.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, Independent Educational Consultants Association

(Part 2 of 2)

Yesterday we published the results of  the specific suggestions we received for making the conference more valuable to IECA members, schools, and programs that work in the area of emotional and behavioral needs. With the results we noted the numerous changes we are making to the conference schedule to ensure more interaction between consultants and programs and between programs and traditional schools. As part of the same survey we concluded with an open-ended request for comments, thoughts, or questions about the conference schedule. We read hundreds of such remarks. Eleven suggestions/comments seemed to come up often enough that we wanted to respond. In doing so we note that we have provided honest, direct answers which do not necessarily satisfy everyone’s concerns.

1.  Can you require IECA Members to attend the Swap? We do encourage them strongly and perhaps we need to do more. But remember, not all consultants do special needs, so some do not attend the Swap, just as some consultants who do ONLY special needs do not attend the School & College Fair.

2. Can you schedule more interactive and point/counterpoint sessions like we had in Charlotte? We agree, please suggest topics!

3.  Can’t we have more conferences in the West? We do need to pay more attention to conference cities. We have Dallas, TX scheduled for 2011 and San Diego, CA scheduled for 2013.

4. Consider holding one conference a year just for schools and colleges, and the other just for special needs. We’ll have the Strategic Planning task Force look into this idea. One fear is that one of those may get many more participants leaving programs or schools very frustrated. It also hurts the effort requested above for more interaction between therapeutic programs and traditional schools. Finally it also raises concerns that we create a fissure between specialties among consultants.

5. Can you offer CEUs for MSWs and psychologists? We’ll look into doing that. If we can, we will.

6.  Why do special needs programs pay for a full week, but only get to attend for a few days? Why don’t we get to attend as much as schools or colleges? This is a misperception that I would like to correct once and for all. Traditional schools, colleges, therapeutic schools and programs all pay the same fee, and all have the same amount of time at the conference. Schools and colleges attend from Wednesday mid-day to Thursday afternoon. Therapeutic programs have attended from Friday morning to Saturday mid-day. When therapeutic programs requested more interaction with traditional school representatives a few years ago, we began allowing school reps to visit the Therapeutic Information Swap one hour prior to its opening. (And based on the change we announced on  this blog yesterday, you will now be attending 2+ days.)  Only consultants attend for the entire 3-1/2 days of the conference. IECA member consultants pay less, as their dues cover a portion of the conference. Everyone is treated as fairly as possible. The conference fee is comparable to other conferences, and unlike some others we do not charge extra for tables at the Swap or Fair.

7.  Have you considered holding one national and several regional conferences each year? The Strategic Planning Task Force, a regional group task force, and the Board of Directors are looking into these issues right now.

8.  Why is the Therapeutic program always at the end? Why not alternate so that every other conference the Therapeutic days are at the beginning? What looks like an obvious possibility is simply not feasible. More than 100 educational consultants participate in college campus visits prior to the start of the conference. Typically this involves 7 – 8 colleges over three days. Others visit 3 – 5 boarding schools. Members consider these visits a central part of their conference experience. When therapeutic schools and programs exist near the conference city, they are typically spread out, allowing one or two such visits. In any case these visits must occur on a weekday. If the college part of the program was set later in the week, Friday and Saturday, it could then take consultants out of the conference hotel on the days that therapeutic programs are available. Remember that 80% of those doing therapeutic placements also do schools or colleges, so the chances of consultants opting for tours over the Swap are unacceptable. A secondary reason is that we commit to certain hotel room pick up (booked rooms per night) years in advance, and we are required to pay for unused rooms. When attendees are unsure of the schedule (due to constant shifts) they tend to book the whole week, only to cancel rooms at the last minute. Such last minute cancellations, which marked our earlier events prior to the format change in 2007, run into hundreds of rooms with penalty fees over $100,000. So while we can’t ‘flip’ the days, we try to do everything we can to meet all attendees needs.

9.  Can you increase the participation of educational consultants? The numbers seemed low in Toronto. It didn’t just seem that way as the number of attending consultants was low. Some attendees LOVED it and said it made for quality discussions. Others felt frustrated. Don’t worry though: no more Canada meetings for a long time. As someone else pointed out in their survey: remember that some of what we all are seeing is the impact of the terrible economy, not necessarily ongoing concerns.

10.  Can we have more clinical sessions? This ties in with a concern we heard from consultants: Programs used to send a therapist or programming person. Today, most send marketing and admission reps. Consultants would prefer hearing from those who work directly with students. The more such attendees we have, the more clinically-based presentations we can offer. (And the happier consultants will be!)

11. Finally: Can’t you do something to allow for more networking during the conference? Conference Central has proved to be a great addition. In Ohio, thanks to your suggestions, we will be expanding the time for breaks to promote more networking. We think you’ll notice the difference.

Colleagues, I hope the information shared over the last two days demonstrates our commitment to keeping a dialogue going toward making all of your interactions with IECA and our members positive, valuable, and cost effective. As you can see, wherever possible we effected change immediately with most suggestions being implemented this fall in November. We’ll be in touch soon after to see whether you noticed the differences.

The 2010 IECA Fall Conference is in Cincinnati, November 4 – 6. Registration will open the first week of August and all information will be available on our Web site. We hope to see you there!

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, Independent Educational Consultants Association

(Part 1 of 2)

Last month we invited special needs consultants, as well as representatives of wilderness and emotional growth schools (more than 1,000 professionals), to provide us with feedback on a number of ideas about ways to make the IECA conferences more meaningful and valuable to those working with troubled teens. Hundreds responded and we are grateful for the honest feedback. We promised to reply, and here are the survey results along with an explanation of what we will do, might do in the future, and won’t do!

Tomorrow we will post the 11 most common questions or suggestions that we received in the open feedback section of the questionnaire.

[1] One suggestion was to extend the Traditional Boarding School and College Fair by an hour on Thursday morning, and allow special needs program representatives to join consultants for the final hour to allow for school-to-program networking. Of those expressing an opinion on this issue, 85% of respondents were in favor.

Our Response: We have extended the Fair by 45 minutes (the most we could find) in Ohio this fall, and all special needs program representatives will be invited in for the final hour.

[2] The next proposal was to change to an expo format: programs would each get a 10×10 booth to staff for three full days with consultants choosing when they wish to go to the expo hall instead of educational programming. Of those responding, 28% were in favor.

Our Response: We have tabled this proposal and will not move toward a large exposition hall.

[3] We asked you to consider a change that would ensure a period of overlap when all conference attendees—schools, colleges, special needs programs, and consultants—would all be in attendance at the same time. Of those giving us an opinion on this topic 93% were in favor.

Our Response: Much of the Ohio program was already created, but we were able to rework it. After the final hour of Thursday morning’s School & College Fair there will be breakouts and a lunch with a wonderful speaker, for all attendees. There will also be opportunities while everyone is in attendance for networking in Conference Central.

[4] We asked how you felt about the desire of IECA members to have some educational sessions just for consultants, allowing them opportunities for free discussion on topics of particular interest to them. Of those responding 86% (and more than 95% of IECA members) were in favor.

Our Response: We will implement this change. This will mean more breakout times for special needs representatives, but that one or two at each time period will be designated for educational consultants only.

[5] We asked about bringing back the Saturday morning “Program Showcases” (short presentations by programs) from time to time. Of those with an opinion, 72% were in favor.

Our Response: We will hold two showcases on Saturday morning in Ohio, allowing up to 30 programs to offer brief presentations. There will be no cost to programs to be included, although there will be limited number of spots available.

[6] We asked about the proposal we’ve heard from some to eliminate the Information Swap completely and let networking occur more naturally. Just 23% were in favor of this option.

Our response: We won’t go there!

[7] We asked about the Master Class that has been featured with a nationally known expert offering an intense three-hour session. The responses:

24% wanted to keep them as they are
21% wanted to keep them, but shorten them a bit
23% wanted to eliminate them
12% wanted us to switch to something more interactive
20% wanted to eliminate all Saturday programming

Our Response: Clearly opinion is all over the place, although most IECA members wanted to keep the Master Class concept either in its present form or shorter. In Ohio we have arranged for one of the nation’s top experts on bipolar disorders. The session will be two hours (rather than three), in part to ensure time for the Program Showcases.

[8] We asked about shifting to one conference a year rather than two. Of those with an opinion, 56% were in favor.

Our Response: This question impacts more than just the therapeutic community, and so we need the opinion not just of the Special Needs schools and consultants but the college, traditional boarding schools, vendors, gap year, consultants, etc. All results will go to the Board, as this represents a policy decision. The Board will see your opinion.

Bottom line, we are working actively to incorporate as many ideas as we can, within the structure of existing contracts. We appreciate all those who responded and offered their opinion. Tomorrow we’ll respond to the questions that came up most: frequency, location, daily schedule of conferences, and much more.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, Independent Educational Consultants Association

Sixteen years ago, my first day with IECA was at the start of the spring conference in Raleigh, North Carolina. I believe there were fewer than 250 attendees, including some 80 IECA members. There was no NATSAP back then, Small Boarding School Conferences were intimate events, and The Association of Boarding Schools, just separating from NAIS, was years away from hosting its own conference. Today with more school conferences, therapeutic conferences, college conferences, plus LDA, CHADD, and more, I contemplated the role of IECA gatherings. I wondered if we are we simply duplicating efforts, and more importantly, whether IECA makes a significant contribution to the welfare of students.

To be sure the IECA conferences have grown. Upwards of 1,200 people have attended our conferences, including as many as 300 consultants. There has been a surge in college participation, while attendance from schools and special purpose programs grew rapidly in the first half of the decade and has stabilized. Even as the economy turned sour and where other associations reported 25 to 30 to even 35% percent drops in attendance, IECA has exceeded expectations with only minor declines. As a friend of mine, the director of another educational association, said to me recently, “The rest of us feel lucky to be hanging on…IECA is doing great and YOU’RE the one wondering how to change, improve, and redesign conferences? People come because there’s value to attending.” But again I wonder, with so many other choices out there, what IS the value? What makes IECA conferences unique and valued?

I recently asked a representative of Wintergreen Orchard House, a veteran of trade shows from coast-to-coast, about our conference. “The IECA Conference is a must-attend,” she told me. “It goes on my calendar first.” When I asked why, I was told “No where else can I meet people across disciplines: those in college placements, boarding school administrators, LD experts…it allows me to connect with all of the communities we want to reach.”

I asked an IECA member who has been around for years, someone who I’ll see at NACAC or other regional gathering from time to time. Her view was that IECA conferences provide something no one else does: a holistic view of adolescents. “We see teens as far more than a commodity to be placed or a potential student at a small private college. We know that to understand placement you need to understand the entire child: hopes, fears, learning style, anxieties, traits, and flaws. No where else do I get workshops on so wide a range of topics.”

While attending NATSAP last month I sat down and spoke with the head of a small emotional growth boarding school. He indicated that a few events each year are “musts.” This includes the two IECA conferences, because “…no where else can I speak to educational consultants who directly deal with students and families who are desperate and emotionally spent, and need a real professional to help them through a crisis; and then, turn around and talk to wilderness programs that could feed into my school, then traditional schools that we may feed into, and even colleges who want to understand better who we serve. Where else could I find that?”

And one more: a dean of admission from a college who jokingly told me many years ago that he would “never” tell his admission colleagues about IECA because it was one of the best kept secrets: “The last thing I want is more colleges to come. No where else do I get this wonderful opportunity to talk about my school with professionals who are MUCH more likely to work with students considering private colleges and MUCH more likely to explore colleges out of state. Why would I want my competitors to know about IECA?”

What then does IECA offer? First of all, the unique crowd that assembles: colleges, traditional boarding schools, gap year programs, emotional growth schools, therapeutic programs, and summer opportunities—all who believe in a holistic view of the student. Also, a schedule of workshops that range from NCAA rules to Asperger’s, and from learning communities to parent advocates. And we have worked in recent years to strengthen the academic offerings, even while expanding opportunities for networking in both formal and informal settings. As I look toward Toronto, I can say with confidence that “No Where Else” will such a gathering be possible.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, IECA

Based on a request brought by the IECA Special Needs Committee, the Board of Directors met via teleconference last week. Knowing that members overwhelmingly view the TalkList as a valuable benefit (based on the January 2010 member survey), the effort focused on ways to make the TalkList both more valuable but also ensure that several current concerns are addressed.

Concerns focused on just a few specific area: (1) the tendency of some to reveal too much information in  a case study such that client confidentiality could be compromised; (2) the tendency of some to present so little background as to call in to question whether the person making the post is qualified or ‘did their homework’ before asking for assistance; (3) the actions of some in forwarding TalkList postings to individuals outside of IECA (often in schools or programs), a clear violation of the rules that members agree to support.

Board consensus was that the regulations established should be shared with members more frequently. It was felt that often members sign the TalkList agreement but forget expectations, like proper titles. There was discussion about online training that would review what constitutes a good case study posting: one that provides sufficient information but no identifying characteristics, and demonstrates the research done by the consultant prior to the post. It was also felt that members need to be reminded that it is unacceptable to forward postings outside the membership and that doing so is basis for being removed from the TalkList.

There was discussion about the possibility of creating a TalkList mentor group. Their role would be to assist those trying to frame a posting or to contact those who post something considered improper to explain why and provide assistance in changing to a more valuable post.

Many on the Board felt that there were more significant problems of members venturing into advising beyond their expertise. This was judged to be an issue beyond just the TalkList and will be addressed separately.

The Board will continue this work and create a series of proposals. You may share your thoughts in the comments section below this blog, or send your comments to IECA board president Diane Geller at dianegeller@gmail.com or to me at msklarow@iecaonline.com.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, IECA

Nearly 30 years ago IECA set the standard for the profession of educational consulting by establishing the first Principles of Good Practice. Major revisions several years ago made these ethics guidelines stricter and more demanding, setting limits on the value of gifts, articulating the limits on commercial activities, and places a firm prohibition against activities that heighten student or family anxieties. IECA became one of the first associations in the country that regularly reviewed the marketing materials of applicants to ensure these emphasize a “good fit” over “getting in.”

Now the Independent Educational Consultants Association has again raised the bar substantially by establishing new STANDARDS OF EXCELLENCE for the practice of educational consulting. These new competencies (covering 14 pages of information) ensure that those in the field keep up with the ever-changing body of knowledge and practice in a professional and empathic way. The new document covers the major consulting areas of college advising, school advising, advising of students with learning disabilities, and advising students with special needs (emotional and behavioral problems). Within each advising specialty, competencies are articulated in the areas of assessments, working with the family, working with educational institutions, professional ethics, professional office management, and professional development.

Among the competencies:

• Consultants seeks to empower the student to take charge of the application process.

• Educate families and students about college ranking systems and media coverage in order to bring balance to decision-making and put this information in context.

• Recommend only schools that the consultant has visited except in highly unusual situations; make regular visits to campuses (spending up to 20% of one’s professional time doing so).

• Advise on the best alternatives for the child, regardless of parental desire or pressure. Consultants should seek to help parents understand why actions are recommended.

• Use intake procedures that insure the consultant develops an in-depth understanding of the unique characteristics of each student, i.e. unique abilities, academic learning style, personal characteristics, values, attitudes, feelings, interests, personal strengths and weaknesses, work ethic, aspirations, short-term and long-term goals.

• Prepare students and families for issues surrounding the transition from high school to college, i.e. self-advocacy skills.

• Understand the limitations of and appropriate uses of common assessment instruments.

• Be aware of accreditation, licensure and approval status of programs they recommend.

• Maintain knowledge of programs’ safety records, number of students, maintenance, administrative policies, education, therapy and emotional growth components, food service and quality, population description, confidentiality, and more.

• Respect the families’ and parents’ experience, history, values, religion, goals, and financial parameters in order to factor these in to the application and decision-making process.

The complete document, copyrighted by IECA, is available on the Association’s Web site: www.IECAonline.com.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Emily Snyder, IECA Professional Member (Virginia), and Chair of IECA’s College Committee

For those of you who follow national development of educational issues, I returned home from the IECA Conference to hear Al Sharpton, Newt Gingrich, and Arnie Duncan come together with David Gregory on NBC’s Sunday morning “Meet the Press” to discuss forming a coalition to address what they all believe is a need for national curriculum standards. The implications of such a movement — which we have actually been headed towards for some time — on education from pre-K through college and beyond are enormous. My belief is that any resulting legislation will require us to alter how we work with students and families, regardless of our specialties, in ways that we have not even begun to fathom.

Part of our role as consultants is being aware of what’s on the educational horizon so that we can appropriately guide the students and families we work with as they make expensive and long term educational decisions. That’s why it will be more important for us than ever before to support IECA sponsoring workshops and sessions on controversial legislation that impacts any and all of us — like the Friday afternoon session where members from CAFETY and therapeutic boarding schools came together to discuss their views with consultants.

While there wasn’t much time to do more than touch the surface of the issue and its implications, Mark Sklarow as the moderator, the panelists, and the comments from the audience all served a purpose — IECA created a public dialogue where both sides of the issue were aired and information was shared; a forum I would encourage all of us to support as the nature of our work continues to evolve.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, IECA

From the IECA Conference in NC

I had the opportunity to moderate a truly extraordinary session before 400 attendees at the IECA Conference in Charlotte. A panel of seven represented divergent views on legislation currently being considered that would regulate the therapeutic industry.

Brian Lombrowski, president of CAFETY supports the legislation and spoke of the role of government to ensure the safety of youth, noting that in many states with licensure and standards already in place, the federal legislation would have little impact, but would address problems in states with little or no regulation.

Next Dr. Jared Balmer, co-founder of a residential treatment program, provided some history. He noted that 25 years ago most troubled youth were housed in psychiatric hospitals, a far worse situation than what is afforded young people in RTCs today. He endorsed regulation but indicated concerns with some aspects of the current legislation.

Next up was Chris Noroski, a student at the University of St. Thomas, and vice president of CAFETY. He noted a concern for the lack of standing a teen has in deciding his or her own placement in a program. He drew attention to the conflict that may come when the parent is the customer and the student is the client. Grace Cole, a student from Charlottesville, Virginia, spoke next and reiterated Chris’ point that students deserve greater say in deciding their own fate and spoke of the need of students to be able to report suspected abuse.

Dr. John Santa, founder of Montana Academy, countered that from his experience, virtually no adolescents will willingly go to the residential treatment center, and so students cannot be making such decisions and that parents make this decisions out of concern for the well-being of their child. He also noted the danger that can come if students can regularly make accusations without foundation, to federal or state authorities. The result of the proposed bill, he said, is that programs would opt for safety, rather than treatment that might invite accusations of violations.

Lon Woodbury, chair of the Special Needs Committee of the Independent Educational Consultants Association spoke next, noting a series of legislative attempts to serve troubled teens that have been unsuccessful. He reminded everyone that even if well-intended, the key to results in new laws are in the regulations and guidelines that are written to implement the law and that these often corrupt the original intent.

Dr. Robert Friedman, a professor in the Department of Child and Family Studies at the University of South Florida, was the final panelist. He expressed concern for programs, Web sites, and unethical consultants that prey on parent anxieties, noting that many of the programs in the room, and IECA, seem committed to raising standards and operating in an ethical manner. He offered that efforts must be made to deal with those less ethical and those who do not work to meet higher standards.

During questions and answers, attendees raised questions about why the legislation doesn’t include traditional boarding schools, as well as questions about lowering the age of consent, as has been done in Washington state.

In the end it was remarkable because it marked the first opportunity for each side in this important debate to listen and speak with each other and to begin a dialogue. I was taken at one point by Dr. Santa’s view that 10 of the 14 regulations outlined in the bill he completely agreed with, and he saw two as administrative annoyances that he could live with. That left just two parts of the bill where he disagreed–with some vehemence–but this showed me that both sides are closer together than anyone had thought. The CAFETY and A-START folks are NOT trying to close down all residential programs, and the therapeutic industry folks accept the value and need for some regulation or licensure.

In the end I think it was a worthwhile exercise, and I had dozens of attendees seek me out to offer their opinion that the session was interesting, valuable, and a breakthrough. We look forward to continuing the dialogue and finding the role consultants may play in ensuring student success and family harmony.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

I had a good meeting Wednesday with Jan Moss, outgoing executive director and Cliff Brownstein, the new NATSAP executive. We had a wide-ranging discussion about pending legislation, ethics, conferences, and parent inquiries. I am looking forward to discovering possibilities for our two organizations to work together in new and dynamic ways. I’m also thrilled that Jan will be at our gathering in San Francisco.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser