PART 1. TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION COORDINATING BOARD
CHAPTER 1. AGENCY ADMINISTRATION
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 1, Subchapter A, §1.8, Historically Underutilized Business (HUBs) Program, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3074). The rule will not be republished.
The Coordinating Board adopts the amendment adopting the Comptroller's rules involving HUBs as required by Texas Government Code section 2161.003. Specifically, this amendment adopts the Comptroller's rules rather than the Texas Building and Procurement Division rules. Further, this amendment removes an outdated citation to the Administrative Code and replaces it with a citation to the Comptroller's current HUB rules.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendment.
The Board adopts this rule under its general rulemaking authority granted by section Texas Education Code section 61.027.
The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 61.027, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt and publish rules in accordance with Texas Government Code, Chapter 2001.
The adopted amendment makes conforming changes to the HUB Program rules.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403382
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6271
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts the repeal of Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 1, Subchapter A, §1.10, Administration of the Open Records Act, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2888). The rule will not be republished.
The adopted repeal removes a rule that is unnecessary because the process of handling such a request is governed by statute under Chapter 552 of the Texas Government Code.
This rule was outdated and largely restated the statute, and where there is additional direction, dealt with internal procedures, which is not the function of administrative rules.
The Coordinating Board has the authority to repeal this rule under its general rulemaking authority granted by Texas Education Code, Section 61.027.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the repeal.
The repeal is adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 61.027, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt and publish rules in accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter 2001.
The adopted repeal affects the public information process.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403383
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6271
19 TAC §§1.220 - 1.223, 1.225, 1.226
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 1, Subchapter T, §§1.220 - 1.223, 1.225 and 1.226, Workforce Education Course Manual Advisory Committee, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2889). The rules will not be republished.
This amendment revises and clarifies the purpose and tasks assigned to the committee. The advisory committee was created to provide advice to the Coordinating Board regarding content, structure, currency and presentation of the Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM) and its courses; coordinate field engagement in processes, maintenance, and use of the WECM; and provide assistance in identifying new courses, new programs of study, developments within existing programs represented by courses in the manual, vertical and horizontal alignment of courses within programs, and obsolescence of programs of study and courses.
Rule 1.220, Authority and Specific Purposes, is amended to assign the Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM) Advisory Committee responsibilities to coordinate field engagement in maintaining the WECM, to identify new courses, and to identify new programs of study. This amendment removes the responsibility of the WECM Advisory Committee to make recommendations.
Rule 1.221, Definitions, is amended to provide clarity regarding the use of the term Board.
Rule 1.222, Committee Membership and Officers, is amended to provide the full title of Texas Education Code. The amendment also removes reference to workforce education and adds career and technical education, which includes workforce education and continuing education to align with the terminology in §§2.320 - 2.330 of this title (relating to Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance and Approval).
Rule 1.223, Duration, is amended to change the year that the WECM Advisory Committee will be abolished.
Rule 1.225, Tasks Assigned to the Committee, is amended to provide clarity regarding the specific tasks for which the WECM Advisory Committee is responsible. The amendment removes the responsibility to approve local need course requests and adds responsibilities related to the process of career and technical education course maintenance and approval as specified in §§2.320 - 2.330 of this title (relating to Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance and Approval).
Rule 1.226, Report to the Board; Evaluation of Committee Costs and Effectiveness, is amended to remove the requirement for the WECM Advisory Committee to report recommendations to the Board. This amendment aligns with the adopted amendment to §1.225 of this title (relating to Tasks Assigned to the Committee).
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code, §130.001, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules and regulations for public junior colleges; and §61.026, granting the Coordinating Board authority to establish advisory committees.
The adopted amendment affects Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 1, Subchapter T.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403384
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6344
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter A, General Provision, §§2.5, 2.8, and 2.9, with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2891). The rules will be republished. Section 2.3 and §2.7 are adopted without changes and will not be republished.
The amendments improve the administrability of chapter 2.
Rule 2.3, Definitions, list definitions broadly applicable to all subchapters in chapter 2. The amendments add definitions for career and technical education program and course approval and provide alignment with federal definitions for doctoral degree programs. These definitions are aligned to those that appear throughout Board rules, including in the chapter 13 funding rules and in other subchapters that apply to program approval. Rule 2.3(22) is added to specify the Higher Education Regions of the state are those adopted by the Comptroller of Public Accounts. This revision clarifies the regions by placing them in rule and make them uniform across agencies.
Rule 2.5, General Criteria for Program Approval, contains a list of general criteria broadly applicable to all new program requests. The revisions include adding a criterion for program approval that determines whether the program provides a credential of value based on the methodology for funding set out in Board rules. The amendments also clarify that a joint degree program may be approved as a substantive revision to an existing program if at least one of the programs is already approved.
Rule 2.7, Informal Notice and Comment on Proposed Local Programs, creates an opportunity for institutions of higher education to submit a comment related to program proposals submitted by nearby institutions. This notice and comment period provides a mechanism for the Board to collect information related to whether the program is needed by the state and local community and whether it unnecessarily duplicates existing offerings. The amendments provide clarity on the notification and opportunity to comment on new degree programs.
Rule 2.8, Time Limit on Implementing Approved New Programs or Administrative Changes, establishes a time limit on the effectiveness of Board approvals. This provision ensures that the information used to grant the approval, including program need, remains current before a program is implemented. Amendments allow institutions to request an extension on program implementation and authorize the Commissioner to grant the extension for good cause.
Rule 2.9, Revisions and Modifications to an Approved Program, describes the process institutions must follow to notify the Coordinating Board about substantive and non-substantive revisions and modifications to approved programs and administrative structure.
The amendment changes the approval level for substantive revisions and modifications of approved degree programs. The amendments provide greater process and clarity for creation of a joint degree program and specificity as to which revisions require additional approval by the Board or Commissioner.
Subsequent to the posting of the rules in the Texas Register, the following changes are incorporated into the adopted rule.
Section 2.5, General Criteria for Program Approval, paragraph (9) is amended to improve clarity by replacing workforce standards with skill standards recognized by the Texas Workforce Investment Council. The change brings this section of rule into alignment with new rules in chapter 2, subchapter L, concerning the Approval Process for a Career and Technical Education Certificate.
Section 2.8, Time Limit on Implementing Approved New Programs or Administrative Changes, is amended to clarify this section is applicable to revision and modification of existing degree programs. The amended language better aligns with other sections of this chapter and Coordinating Board processes and documentation regarding program approval.
Section 2.9, Revisions and Modifications to an Approved Program, is amended to clarify the approval level required for substantive revision and modification of an approved program. The amended rule makes clear Board approval is required for any substantive revision made to an approved doctoral or professional program. This section is further amended to explain board approval is required for substantive revision of a bachelor's or master's program initially approved by the Board after September 1, 2023. Substantive revisions to bachelor's and master's programs approved by the Board, Commissioner, or Assistant Commissioner before September 1, 2023 may be approved by the Assistant Commissioner.
The following comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
Comment from South Texas College: The proposed revision to rule 2.5 General Criteria for Program Approval indicates that "the program provides a credential of value as defined in chapter 13, subchapter S, of Board Rules" as part of the criteria. Chapter 13 states that "The Coordinating Board shall calculate the expected return on investment for each program based on the most current data available to the agency for the funding year for each program or a comparable program." Is this information already available on the THECB site, and if not, is there an estimated time of when it will be available?
Response: The Coordinating Board thanks the institution for its comment. Information and data related to the Coordinating Board's analysis of credentials of value, including data dashboards, is available at https://databridge.highered.texas.gov/credentials-of-value/ for institutional reference. As the formulas used to calculate credentials of value are refined and improved, additional information will be made available to institutions. For questions related to specific funding criteria for community college credentials please contact ccfinance@highered.texas.gov.
Comments from San Jacinto College:
Comment one requested clarification of the summary of 2.3 in the Texas Register which read "community and technical education" instead of "career and technical education."
Response: The Coordinating Board thanks the institution for its comment. The textual error has been corrected in the adoption rule packet summary.
Comment two requested the addition of the word "program" to several sections of 2.3, as well as the addition of a definition of program. The primary concern is that without the term "program" integrated, it is unclear which types of credentials, sometimes referred to as "program," the rules may apply to in other sections.
Response: The Coordinating Board thanks the institution for its comment. Adding a general definition of "program" may have unintended consequences across the remaining subchapters of Texas Administrative code. Additionally, each subchapter typically includes a "Purpose" section which states which types of degrees and certificates the chapter is applicable if it is not applicable to all. Exceptions to applicability are noted in rule text, as needed. The Coordinating Board may include clarifications in FAQ documents for the field.
Comment three requests clarification of the reference to "academic or workforce standards" referenced in 2.5(9).
Response: The Coordinating Board thanks the institution for its comment and has amended section 2.5(9) to improve clarity by replacing workforce standards with skill standards recognized by the Texas Workforce Investment Council. This change brings this section of rule into alignment with new rules in chapter 2, subchapter L, concerning the Approval Process for a Career and Technical Education Certificate.
The amendments are adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 61.0512, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to authorize new academic programs; and Section 61.003 which contains several definitions for terms used throughout this chapter. Other relevant provisions of law include Texas Education Code, Section 130.001, which grants the Coordinating Board the responsibility to adopt policies and establish general rules necessary to carry out statutory duties with respect to public junior colleges; and Sections 130.001 - 130.312, which provides authority to authorize baccalaureate degrees at public junior colleges.
The amendments affect Texas Education Code Sections 61.003, 61.0512, 130.001, and 130.301-130.312.
§2.5.General Criteria for Program Approval.
(a) In addition to any criteria specified in statute or this chapter for a specific program approval, the Assistant Commissioner, Commissioner, or Board, as applicable, shall consider the following factors:
(1) Evidence that the program is needed by the state and the local community, as demonstrated by student demand for similar programs, labor market information, and value of the credential;
(2) Whether the program unnecessarily duplicates programs offered by other institutions of higher education or private or independent institutions of higher education, as demonstrated by capacity of existing programs and need for additional graduates in the field;
(3) Comments provided to the Board from institutions noticed under §2.7 of this subchapter;
(4) Whether the program has adequate financing from legislative appropriation, funds allocated by the Board, or funds from other sources;
(5) Whether the program's cost is reasonable and provides a value to students and the state when considering the cost of tuition, source(s) of funding, availability of other similar programs, and the earnings of students or graduates of similar credential programs in the state to ensure the efficient and effective use of higher education resources;
(6) Whether the program provides a credential of value as defined in chapter 13, subchapter S, of Board Rules;
(7) Whether and how the program aligns with the metrics and objectives of the Board's Long-Range Master Plan for Higher Education;
(8) Whether the program has necessary faculty and other resources including support staff to ensure student success;
(9) Whether the program meets academic standards specified by law or prescribed by Board rule or skill standards recognized by the Texas Workforce Investment Council, if they exist for the discipline; and
(10) Past compliance history and program quality of the same or similar programs, where applicable.
(b) In the event of conflict between this rule and a more specific rule regarding program approval, the more specific rule shall control.
(c) A request for approval of a joint degree program that does not include existing degree programs is considered a new degree program and is subject to new degree program approval requirements.
§2.8.Time Limit on Implementing Approved Programs or Program Revisions.
(a) Unless otherwise stipulated at the time of approval, if an approved new degree program does not enroll students within two years of approval, that approval is no longer valid.
(b) An institution may submit a request to the Assistant Commissioner for approval to lengthen that time limit by up to five years from the approval date. The request must include a description of the good cause or compelling academic reason for extending the program implementation timeline.
(c) The Commissioner has discretion to approve or deny the request if the Commissioner determines there is good cause for the extension, and it is in the best interest of the students to be served by the program.
(d) Unless otherwise stipulated at the time of approval, if the institution does not implement the approved program revision or modification within two years of approval, that approval is no longer valid.
(e) Provisions of this section apply to all approvals and changes under this chapter.
§2.9.Revisions and Modifications to an Approved Program.
(a) Substantive revisions and modifications that materially alter the nature of the program, physical location, or modality of delivery, as determined by the Commissioner, include, but are not limited to:
(1) Closing the program in one location and moving it to a second location;
(2) Changing the funding from self-supported, as defined in subchapter O of this chapter relating to self-supporting programs, to formula-funded or vice versa;
(3) Adding a new formula-funded or self-supported track to an existing program; and
(4) Creating a joint program that includes one or more existing approved degree programs.
(b) Board approval is required for any substantive revision or modification of an approved doctoral or professional program. Substantive revisions to bachelor's and master's programs approved by the Board on or after September 1, 2023 require Board approval. Substantive revisions to bachelor's and master's programs approved by the Board, Commissioner, or Assistant Commissioner before September 1, 2023 may be approved by the Assistant Commissioner.
(c) Non-substantive revisions and modifications that do not materially alter the nature of the program, location, or modality of delivery, as determined by the Assistant Commissioner, include, but are not limited to:
(1) Increasing the number of semester credit hours of a program for reasons other than a change in programmatic accreditation requirements;
(2) Consolidating a program with one or more existing programs;
(3) Offering a program in an off-campus face-to-face format;
(4) Altering any condition listed in the program approval notification;
(5) Changing the CIP Code of the program;
(6) Increasing the number of semester credit hours if the increase is due to a change in programmatic accreditation requirements;
(7) Reducing the number of semester credit hours, so long as the reduction does not reduce the number of required hours below the minimum requirements of the institutional accreditor, program accreditors, and licensing bodies, if applicable;
(8) Changing the Degree Title or Designation; and
(9) Other non-substantive revisions that do not materially alter the nature of the program, location, or modality of delivery, as determined by the Assistant Commissioner.
(d) The non-substantive revisions and modifications in subsection (c)(1) - (5) of this section are subject to Assistant Commissioner Approval Regular Review under §2.4 of this subchapter. All other non-substantive revisions and modifications are subject to Assistant Commissioner Approval Expedited Review under §2.4(a)(2)(B) of this subchapter.
(e) The following program revisions or modifications require Notification Only under §2.4(1) of this subchapter:
(1) A public university or public health-related institution shall notify the Coordinating Board of changes to administrative units, including creation, consolidation, or closure of an administrative unit. Coordinating Board Staff will update the institution's Program Inventory pursuant to this notification.
(2) All institutions shall notify the Coordinating Board of the intent to offer an approved program through distance education following the procedures in §2.206 of this chapter (relating to Distant Education Degree or Certificate Program Notification).
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403385
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter B, §2.32. Notification, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3075). The rules will not be republished.
The adopted amendments revise the requirements for notification of new certificate programs.
Texas Education Code, §61.0512(a), requires the Coordinating Board to approve all new certificate programs.
Rule 2.32, Notification, is amended to remove the provision requiring CIP codes for all courses in the certificate.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 61.0512, which states that institutions may offer new certificate programs with the Board's approval.
The adopted amendment affects Texas Education Code Section 61.0512.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403386
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter C, §2.41, Planning Notification: Notice of Intent to Plan, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2895). The rule will not be republished.
The adopted amendments include the addition of language to make clear this section applies to proposed degree programs. Texas Education Code §61.0512(b) requires institutions to notify the Board prior to beginning preliminary planning for a new degree program. An institution is planning for a new degree program if it takes any action that leads to the preparation of a proposal for a new degree program.
Section 2.41, Planning Notification: Notice of Intent to Plan, provides the information required for preliminary Planning Notifications for proposed degree programs. This rule also outlines Board requirements for providing labor market and other relevant information to institutions following submission of the Planning Notification.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code, §61.0512(b), which requires institutions to notify the Board prior to beginning preliminary planning for a new degree program.
The adopted amendments affect Texas Education Code, §61.0512(b).
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403387
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter D, §2.58, Embedded Credential: Academic Associate Degree, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3075). The rules will not be republished.
The amendment clarifies which institution type may offer the embedded academic associate degree and brings rules into alignment with statute. Texas Education Code (TEC), §§61.051 and 61.0512, provides the Coordinating Board with authority to approve new degree programs at public institutions of higher education. TEC, §130.001, grants the Coordinating Board the responsibility to adopt policies and establish general rules necessary to carry out statutory duties with respect to public junior colleges. TEC, §130.0104, requires each public junior college district to establish a multidisciplinary studies associate degree, and authorizes the Board to adopt rules as necessary. TEC, §61.05151, requires that the number of semester credit hours required for the associate degree not exceed the minimum number required by the institution's accreditor, in the absence of a compelling academic reason provided by the institution.
The amendment clarifies subchapter D (relating to Approval Process for New Associate Degrees) applies only to new academic associate degrees and §2.58 (relating to Embedded Credential: Academic Associate Degree) applies only to embedded academic associate degrees offered by public universities and health-related institutions.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code, Sections 61.051 and 61.0512, which provide that no new degree or certificate program may be added to any public institution of higher education expect with specific prior approval of the Coordinating Board.
The adopted amendments affect Texas Education Code Sections 61.051 and 61.0512.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403388
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter E, §2.87, Criteria for New Baccalaureate Degree Programs, with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3076). The rules will be republished.
The amendment provides clarity on the number of baccalaureate degree programs each public junior college district is authorized to implement.
Texas Education Code, §61.0512(h)(2), gives the Coordinating Board authority to approve programs generally; and Texas Education Code, chapter 130, subchapter L, grants the Board authority to administer approval processes for baccalaureate degree programs at public junior colleges specifically. Rule 2.87, Criteria for New Baccalaureate Degree Programs, contains the criteria Board Staff use to evaluate baccalaureate degree program proposals submitted by public junior colleges. The amended section is proposed under Texas Education Code, §130.306, which limits public junior colleges to no more than five baccalaureate degree programs at any time. The amendment makes clear this statutory limitation applies to each junior college district regardless of accreditation as one institution or a district with multiple independently accredited institutions.
Subsequent to the posting of the rules in the Texas Register, the following change is incorporated into the adopted rule.
Section 2.87, Criteria for New Baccalaureate Degree Programs, contains additional amendments relating to articulation agreements. The amendments make clear the Coordinating Board requires public junior colleges satisfy §130.309 of statute by securing a teach-out agreement with a Texas public institution of higher education for the first five years following implementation of an approved baccalaureate program. The amendments further clarify the Coordinating Board does not expect a public junior college to have articulation agreements in place for supporting Associate of Applied Science degree programs.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code, Sections 61.0512(h)(2), 130.302, and 130.312, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to administer and approve certain baccalaureate degree programs at public junior colleges.
The adopted amendment affects Texas Education Code Sections 61.0512(h)(2), 130.302, and 130.312, and 19 Texas Administrative Code, chapter 2, subchapter E.
§2.87.Criteria for New Baccalaureate Degree Programs.
(a) The Board may authorize baccalaureate degree programs at a public junior college in the fields of applied science, including a degree program in applied science with an emphasis on early childhood education, applied technology, or nursing, that have a demonstrated workforce need.
(b) All proposed baccalaureate degree programs must meet the criteria set out in this subsection, in addition to the general criteria in subchapter A, §2.5 (relating to General Criteria for Program Approval), and subchapter F, §2.118 (relating to Post-Approval Program Reviews), of this chapter.
(c) Each public junior college seeking to offer a baccalaureate degree program must comply with the requirements and limitations specified in Tex. Educ. Code, chapter 130, subchapter L, except for §130.307(4). A public junior college is not required to establish articulation agreements for the supporting Associate of Applied Science degree program(s) but must secure a teach-out agreement with a Texas public institution of higher education that offers a similar baccalaureate program.
(d) A public junior college offering a baccalaureate degree program must meet all applicable accreditation requirements of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges. A public junior college that has attained accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges is authorized to change accreditors to any accrediting agency approved by the Board under chapter 4, subchapter J of this title (relating to Accreditation).
(e) A public junior college district may not offer more than five baccalaureate degree programs at any time not-withstanding if accredited as a single institution.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403389
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter G, Approval Process for New Doctoral and Professional Degree Programs, §2.145 and §2.151, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3077). The rules will not be republished.
The adopted amendments include removing language from 2.145(d) regarding costs associated with external review of proposed doctoral and professional degree programs and correcting a reference cited in §2.151. Texas Education Code, §61.0512, states that a public institution of higher education may not offer any new degree program, including doctoral and professional degrees, without Board approval.
Rule 2.145, Presentation of Requests and Steps for Implementation, sets out the steps an institution must follow in order to request a new doctoral or professional degree, as well as the approval procedures Board Staff must follow for these programs. The amendment removes language requiring institutions to pay costs associated with external review of a proposed doctoral or professional program. The Coordinating Board has borne the cost of the review, this repeal conforms the text to the practice.
Rule 2.151, Revisions to Approved Doctoral or Professional Programs, outlines how an institution requests a revision or modification of an approved doctoral or professional program. The amendment clarifies that an institution may request a revision or modification of the program in line with §2.9 regarding Revisions and Modifications to an Approved Program, not §2.7 regarding Informal Notice and Comment on Proposed Local Programs. This corrects a typographical error.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendments are adopted under Texas Education Code, Sections 61.051 and 61.0512, which provide that no new degree program may be added at any public institution of higher education except with specific prior approval of the Coordinating Board.
The adopted amendments affect Texas Education Code, Sections 61.051 and 61.0512.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403390
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter I, §2.181 and §2.182, Review of Existing Degree Programs, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 31, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3868). The rules will not be republished.
The amendments streamline graduate program review by eliminating duplicative reporting criteria. The amendments require Board Staff to deliver an annual update on all new doctoral programs that are within the five-year post-implementation reporting period and provides the Board with authority to extent the reporting period beyond five years. The amendments authorize the Commissioner to grant an extension to the reporting deadline for institutions that demonstrate good cause.
Rule 2.181, Academic Programs at Public Universities and Public Health-Related Institutions, amendments remove duplicative language regarding reporting deadlines and requirements for existing graduate degree programs. Revisions include removing (10) which requires an institution to submit a graduate program review to the Coordinating Board no later than 180 days after receiving an evaluative report from an external review team and (11) which allows institutions to satisfy Coordinating Board graduate program reporting requirements by submitting reviews conducted for programmatic accreditation. These requirements are included in (8) of this section.
Rule 2.182, Doctoral and Professional Degree Programs, amendments add language requiring Board Staff to submit annual reports to the Board on the progress of all new doctoral programs that are within the five-year post-implementation reporting period. The amendments give the Board authority to extend annual reporting requirements for new doctoral programs and provide the Commissioner with authority to extend an institution's reporting deadline.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendments are adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 61.002, which directs the Coordinating Board to coordinate higher education through efficient and effective use of resources and elimination of costly program duplication, and Section 61.0512(e), which requires the Coordinating Board to conduct reviews of programs at least every ten years after the program's establishment.
The adopted amendments affect Texas Education Code §§61.002 and 61.0512(e).
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403391
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 31, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter K, §§2.230 - 2.241, Approval Process for an Applied Associate Degree, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3078). The rules will not be republished.
The new subchapter aligns the approval process for an applied associate degree with the approval process for other degree types required under chapter 2 of this title.
Rule 2.230, Purpose, establishes a process for a public junior college to request a new applied associate degree program from the Coordinating Board.
Rule 2.231, Authority, contains statutory provisions authorizing the Coordinating Board to approve new degree programs offered by public institutions of higher education. Texas Education Code (TEC), §61.0512, permits institutions to add new certificate and degree programs only with prior approval of the Coordinating Board. TEC, §130.001, grants the Coordinating Board the responsibility to adopt policies and establish general rules necessary to carry out statutory duties with respect to public junior colleges. TEC, §61.05151, requires that the number of semester credit hours required for the applied associate degree not exceed the minimum number required by the institution's accreditor, in the absence of a compelling academic reason provided by the institution.
Rule 2.232, Submission of Planning Notification, requires a public junior college to submit a Planning Notification to the Coordinating Board prior to submitting a request for a new applied associate degree. The proposed rule requires Coordinating Board staff to provide labor market information to the public junior college within 60 days of receiving the planning notification. The purpose of this section is to ensure that each institution has adequately planned for a new degree program and has information about the potential value and need for the program on a local and statewide basis. The Coordinating Board intends to provide input to each institution about both the need for the program and the value of the resulting credential.
Rule 2.233, Applied Associate Degree Length and Program Content, contains the required criteria for approval of a new applied associate degree program. These provisions ensure the quality of each program and that the program complies with relevant statutes and rules.
Rule 2.234, Approval Required for an Applied Associate Degree, subjects new applied associate degree programs to the approval levels required in subchapter A of this chapter (relating to General Provisions). Proposed programs with more than 50 percent new content require Commissioner approval.
Rule 2.235, Presentation of Requests and Steps for Implementation for a New Applied Associate Degree, lays out the steps for public junior colleges to request a new applied associate degree program. The proposed rules require Coordinating Board staff to provide informal notice and 30-day opportunity for comment to other institutions of higher education in the region. Comments received are taken into consideration during the program review process. This process is intended to ensure there is sufficient statewide and regional demand for each program without unnecessary duplication of programs.
Rule 2.236, Approval Required for a Proposed Revision to an Applied Associate Degree Program, subjects program revisions to approval by notification as required in subchapter A, §2.4(1) of this chapter (relating to Types of Approval Required) if the modifications contain less than 50 percent new content, a new degree name, a new CIP code that will not result in the funding reclassification, the addition of a new Level 1 or 2 certificate consisting of courses in the applied associate program, phasing out an existing applied associate degree program, adding or removing a Special Topics or Local Need course from the curriculum, changing the semester credit hours or contact hours, or changing the length of the applied associate degree by one semester or more. Changes to the CIP code that result in funding reclassification to a high-demand field require Coordinating Board approval. The purpose of this section is to ensure that programs are meeting regional and statewide need, meet the required statutory and rule requirements, but also provide for a streamlined process where appropriate.
Rule 2.237, Criteria for an Applied Associate Degree, requires proposed applied associate degree programs at public junior colleges to meet criteria in subchapter A, §2.5 of this chapter (relating to General Criteria for Program Approval). This requirement ensures that all programs meet the same standards required by statute and rule, and align with the statewide plan for higher education while also providing credentials of value to students.
Rule 2.238, Approval and Semester Credit Hours, subjects new applied associate degrees to the 60 semester credit hours minimum set by the institutional accreditor. Programs exceeding the 60-hour limit must provide a compelling academic reason for the excess hours.
Rule 2.239, Post-Approval Program Reviews, requires the Coordinating Board to conduct post-approval reviews of applied associate degree programs as required in subchapter I of this chapter (relating to Review of Existing Degree Programs).
Rule 2.240, Deactivation and Phasing Out an Applied Associate Degree Program, requires that colleges request phase out of an approved applied associate degree program in accordance with subchapter H of this chapter (relating to Phasing Out Degree and Certificate Programs).
Rule 2.241, Effective Dates of Rules, establishes the effective date of the new rule as September 1, 2024.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the new rules.
The new sections are adopted under Texas Education Code, Sections 61.051, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to coordinate the efficient and effective use of higher education resources and avoid unnecessary duplication; 61.0512, which states that a public institution of higher education may not offer any new degree program without Coordinating Board approval; and 130.001, which grants the Coordinating Board the responsibility to adopt policies and establish general rules necessary to carry out statutory duties with respect to public junior colleges.
The adopted new sections affect Texas Education Code, Sections 61.051, 61.0512, and 130.001.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403392
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter L, §§2.260 - 2.268, Approval Process for a Career and Technical Education Certificate, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3081). The rules will not be republished.
This new section clarifies the categories of career and technical education certificates that may be developed by institutions and the process by which institutions may submit the certificates to receive approval. This new section also provides clarification on certificate titles, program length and content. Lastly, the adopted rule describes the process required for an institution to submit a proposed revision or phase-out and closure of a certificate program.
Rule 2.260, Purpose, states that the purpose of the subchapter is to outline a process for institutions to request approval for new career and technical education certificates from the Coordinating Board.
Rule 2.261, Authority, contains statutory provisions authorizing the Coordinating Board to approve career and technical education certificates offered by Texas public institutions of higher education. Texas Education Code, §61.0512, permits institutions to add new certificate programs only with the specific prior approval of the Coordinating Board.
Rule 2.262, Certificate Titles, Length and Program Content, lists the types of career and technical education certificates institutions may offer and describes characteristics of those certificates. The certificate categories and characteristics in this adopted rule align with longstanding industry standards, as well as with certificate definitions used for purposes of community college funding, as adopted by the Coordinating Board in rule.
The adopted rule contains several categories of certificates already in longstanding use by institutions of higher education, some of which are defined in rule in detail for the first time. These categories include Level 1 Certificates, Level 2 Certificates, Advanced Technical Certificates, Continuing Education Certificates, Enhanced Skills Certificates, and Occupational Skills Awards. The adopted rule specifies the purpose of each certificate type, requirements, prerequisites, and thresholds for certificate lengths where relevant.
The adopted rule also incorporates two newer categories of certificate types: the Institutional Credential Leading to Licensure or Certification (ICLC) and the Third-Party Credential. These definitions align certificate approval rules with categories of credentials used in the new community college finance model as adopted by the Coordinating Board in rule. An ICLC is an institutional credential that has identifiable skill proficiency leading to licensure or certification. The definition is the same as an Occupational Skills Award, but an ICLC may provide training for an occupation that is not included in the Local Workforce Development Board's Target Occupation list. A Third-Party Credential is a certificate for which a third-party provider develops the program content and assessments to evaluate student mastery of content and awards the credential upon successful completion. The institution may embed the credential in an existing course or program or offer the credential as a stand-alone program. The adopted definition includes several criteria for this certificate type, including the inclusion of the certificate in the American Council on Education's (ACE) National Guide.
Rule 2.263, Criteria for Approval, provides clarity to the institution on the content and process requirements that the institution must meet in seeking approval for a certificate. The adopted rule specifically includes the documentation requirements that the institution must provide when seeking approval of a certificate for which no graduate or wage data exist to demonstrate that the certificate is a Credential of Value, including proxy data from a similar certificate program and an attestation from regional employers regarding the hiring of graduates from the program. Defining these documentation requirements will ensure that institutions provide evidence of the value of the new certificate in the labor market, thereby aligning with requirements for the funding of credentials used in the new community college finance model as adopted by the Coordinating Board in rule.
Rule 2.264, Approval Required, defines the factors and the level of approval for a new certificate. Specifically, a proposed new certificate that contains 50 percent or more new content will be subject to expedited review by the Assistant Commissioner. Expedited review will shorten the certificate approval process and must be indicated in the rule. The adopted rule provides clarification to institutions that if a new certificate is selected from an inventory of certificates that the Coordinating Board previously identified as a Credential of Value, the approval will be by notification only. An inventory of certificates that have been identified as Credentials of Value will provide institutions the option of seeking approval for a program that has already demonstrated value in the labor market. Finally, the adopted rule specifies that Third-Party Credentials, Occupational Skills Awards, Advanced Technical Certificates, and Enhanced Skills Certificates will be subject to approval by notification only, thereby significantly shortening the certificate submission and approval time, which will in turn shorten the time to program implementation.
Rule 2.265, Presentation of Requests and Steps for Approval of Proposed New Career and Technical Education Certificates, clarifies that an institution is required to submit an application prior to offering a new Continuing Education Certificate, Level 1 Certificate, Level 2 Certificate, Advanced Technical Certificate, Enhanced Skills Certificate, Occupational Skills Award, Institutional Credential Leading to Licensure or Certification, or Third-Party Credential, and that the institution must gain approval from its governing board prior to submission. This clarification is important as new certificates are now included in these requirements, which is integral in implementing the community college finance model as adopted by the Coordinating Board in rule. The adopted rule also provides clarity on the Coordinating Board approval process and outlines the criteria, timeline, and process for approvals, as well as an institution's option to appeal a decision to the Commissioner of Higher Education. By outlining the certificates that are subject to the adopted rule; the process for submission, approval, and appeal; and the relevant timelines; institutions will have clarity for the planning and implementation of all certificates.
Rule 2.266, Approval Required for a Proposed Revision to a Certificate Program, defines the factors and levels of approval for a revised certificate. Specifically, a proposed revision to a certificate that contains not greater than 49 percent new content will be subject to approval by notification. The adopted rule provides clarity for the specific types of revisions that are allowable and subject to approval by notification. The delineation of the specific certificate revisions that are subject to notification only will shorten the revised certificate submission and approval time, which will in turn shorten the time to program implementation. The adopted rule also clarifies that if a revised certificate includes a change to the Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) code that will result in the funding reclassification of the certificate program to a high-demand field, the proposal will be subject to Assistant Commissioner review and approval. A CIP code change to a high-demand field in the community college funding model would result in the funding of a certificate at a higher rate. Therefore, because of the potential funding impact of this type of CIP code change, review by the Assistant Commissioner is warranted.
Rule 2.267, Phase-Out and Closure of a Certificate Program, provides that institutions must notify and provide a phase-out plan to the Coordinating Board to close a certificate program. This plan is to ensure students are provided the opportunity to be notified and complete the program without penalty.
Rule 2.268, Effective Date of Rules, defines the date of rule implementation. The Coordinating Board intends to adopt a delayed effective date of September 1, 2024, in order to give institutions and the agency time to adopt revised processes in alignment with the new rule.
No comments were received regarding adoption of the new rule.
The new section is adopted under Texas Education Code, §61.0512, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to approve new certificate programs at institutions of higher education. Texas Education Code, §§130.001 and 130.008, grant the Board the responsibility to adopt policies and establish general rules necessary to carry out statutory duties with respect to a public junior college certificate or degree program. The Board has the responsibility to adopt policies and establish general rules necessary to carry out statutory duties related to a certificate or degree program with respect to Texas State Technical College under Texas Education Code, §135.04, and the Josey School of Vocational Education under Texas Education Code, §96.63.
The adopted new section affects Texas Education Code, §130A.101.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403393
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter M, §§2.290 - 2.297, Approval Process for Local Needs Courses, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2896). The rules will not be republished.
This new section establishes the career and technical education local need course approval subchapter to better define the criteria for a local need course and the process for which an institution receives approval of the course for use in a career and technical education program at their institution. Approval of a local need course is how a new course is added to the Workforce Education Course Manual database when there is no course in the database to address a specific local workforce need. The Coordinating Board maintains a list of approved programs in a Program Inventory for each public junior, technical and state college, and the list of approved courses in the Workforce Education Course Manual for use by public junior, technical, and state colleges during program development. Establishing an approval procedure for courses ensures the accuracy of the inventories, which is necessary for the Board to carry out its duties.
Rule 2.290, Purpose, provides clarity to the institution on the process to receive local need course approval.
Rule 2.291, Authority, states the authority, which is based on Texas Education Code, §130.001(b)(3), and the purpose of maintaining a list of approved programs in a Program Inventory for each public junior, technical and state college, and the list of approved courses in the Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM) for use by public junior, technical, and state colleges during program development. Establishing this local need course approval rule will ensure that accurate inventories of courses will be maintained by the Coordinating Board for use by institutions.
Rule 2.292, Applicability, establishes that this subchapter will apply to all public two-year institutions seeking approval of a proposed local need course.
Rule 2.293, Definitions, paragraph (2) ("Career and Technical Education Course") provides the definition of a Career and Technical Education (CTE) course. Paragraph (4) ("Local Need Course") defines a local need course and where the course will be inventoried for use by an institution. Paragraph (5) ("Special Topics Course") provides the definition of a special topics course and clarification on the difference between a career and technical education local need course in the WECM and a special topics course. Paragraph (6) ("Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM)") defines the Workforce Education Course Manual and the use of the courses in certificate and program development.
Rule 2.294, Local Need Course Approval Requirements, provides clarity to the institution on the requirements of local need course approval, as well as the location of the course in the WECM database once the course is approved. The proposed local need course approval process brings approval of new courses for inclusion in the WECM in line with standard approval processes for new programs in the Coordinating Board's Chapter 2 rules.
Rule 2.295, Administrative Completeness, defines the application, process, and timeline for the institution to submit a local need course for approval. This provision clearly sets out required elements of an application for a local need course approval and gives institutions notice as to anticipated timelines for the Coordinating Board to deem an application complete.
Rule 2.296, Criteria for Proposed Course Approval, defines the factors to submit an application and the elements needed in a local need course for approval. These criteria ensure that the Coordinating Board does not approve duplicative course entries in the WECM database and requires institutions to provide sufficient descriptive information about the proposed course for the Coordinating Board to maintain and administer courses in WECM.
Rule 2.297, Effective Date of Rules, defines the date of rule implementation. The delayed effective date of the rules gives institutions advance notice of the Coordinating Board's changing requirements and allows the agency time to align internal administrative processes with changing procedural requirements.
The following comment was received regarding adoption of the new rule.
Comment: South Texas College submitted a comment regarding renewal of a local need course. Because there is no renewal requirement for a local need course, South Texas College is inquiring if institutions will be required to renew approval for their local need courses every two years.
Response: The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board appreciates this comment, and the point that previously a local need course was required to be renewed by the institution every two years. The formalization of the Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM) course maintenance process in rule and the review of local need courses on an annual basis has made the need for renewal obsolete.
The new sections are adopted under Texas Education Code, §130.001(b)(3), to support Texas Education Code, §61.0512, which gives the Coordinating Board authority to approve new degree or certificate programs. The rules are also adopted under the authority of Texas Education Code chapter 130A which provides funding to public junior colleges for approved courses and programs.
The adopted new section affects Texas Education Code, §§51.4034 and 130A.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403394
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6344
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 2, Subchapter N, §§2.320 - 2.330, Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance and Approval, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2898). The rules will not be republished.
This new subchapter clarifies the career and technical education course maintenance and approval process, including but not limited to the review, revision, addition and archival of courses in the Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM). The subchapter also clarifies the role of the WECM Advisory Committee in maintenance and approval of a career and technical education course for the WECM. Ensuring that the WECM database contains an up-to-date listing of courses is critical, as this listing represents the courses public two-year institutions may use without prior approval from the Coordinating Board. The procedures were previously specified in the Coordinating Board's Guidelines for Instructional Programs in Workforce Education. The Coordinating Board is updating, streamlining, and clarifying these processes and procedure in rule to provide additional oversight and clarity for institutions of higher education.
This new subchapter clarifies the career and technical education course maintenance and approval process, including but not limited to the review, revision, addition and archival of courses in the Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM) and the role of the WECM Advisory Committee in maintenance and approval of a career and technical education course.
Rule 2.320, Purpose, provides clarity to the field on the process of career and technical education maintenance and approval.
Rule 2.321, Authority, establishes the authority for this subchapter under Texas Education Code, §§61.0512 and 130.001.
Rule 2.322, Definitions, establishes standard definitions for roles and career and technical and workforce education terms necessary for the subchapter. Several definitions relate to relevant entities or persons with decision-making capacity or expertise relevant for the career and technical education course approval process. For example, paragraph (1) ("Assistant Commissioner") defines the various leadership positions that may be designated by the Commissioner for approvals. Paragraph (4) ("Institution") provides the definition of the public two-year higher education institutions the rule applies. Paragraph (8) ("Subject Matter Expert") defines the institution representative with expertise in the discipline and to be able to provide input on course content in a career and technical education course during course revision and development. Subject matter experts have business and industry experience in the discipline and can define the knowledge and skills needed to meet industry needs. Paragraph (9) ("Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM) Advisory Committee") defines the role of the advisory committee regarding the WECM database. The WECM advisory committee provides a feedback mechanism to the Coordinating Board on courses in the WECM database. The advisory committee provides a process to maintain courses in the database to stay current with industry-defined knowledge and skills.
Rule 2.322, Definitions, also contains definitions for concepts and terms specific for career and technical and workforce education. Paragraph (2) ("Career and Technical Education Course") provides the definition of a Career and Technical Education (CTE) course approved in the WECM. CTE courses are placed together in a sequence to develop a program at an institution.
Paragraph (3) ("End of Course Outcomes") defines what the student will be able to demonstrate they have learned during a course and are written by subject matter experts during course revision or development. End of course outcomes are developed by subject matter experts at different instructional skill levels of introduction, intermediate and advanced level to provide a progression of skills as a student completes a program. Paragraph (5) ("Local Need Course") defines where the course will be inventoried for use by an institution. Local Need courses are developed by an institution when a skillset is needed to meet local industry needs, and a course is not available in the WECM database with the end of course outcomes to meet that need. Paragraph (6) ("Rubric") defines what the rubric is and what a rubric is used to label in a WECM course. Rubrics are developed to provide a group of courses to define a discipline with introduction, intermediate and advanced end of course outcomes. The courses are typically selected from a single rubric by the institution to develop a logically sequenced program for a discipline. Paragraph (7) ("Special Topics Course") provides the definition of a special topics course and clarification on the difference between a career and technical education course, and special topics course in the WECM. Special Topics courses are used to incorporate transitional or emerging content into a program.
Paragraph (10) ("Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM) Database") defines the Workforce Education Course Manual database and the use of the career and technical education courses in certificate and program development. WECM database is the repository of approved career and technical education courses used during revision or development in programs at an institution.
Rule 2.323, Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance Process, gives an overview of the basic components of the course maintenance process as a whole. Paragraph (1) ("Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance Addition") defines how a course is developed for the WECM database. Courses are developed by subject matter experts to meet industry-defined skill and knowledge requirements. A local need course used by four or more institutions may be added to the WECM database so other colleges can access it to use in their programs. Paragraph (2) ("Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance Archival") relates to archival, which is the process to remove unused, obsolete, or duplicate courses in the WECM database. WECM database course frequency data is reviewed by the team of subject matter experts and decisions are made to archive a course if the course has had no institution use the course in the previous five years. Paragraph (3) ("Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance Review") is the starting point to the course maintenance process on whether a course in the WECM database needs to stay in the WECM database as presented, whether the course needs to be revised or whether the course needs to be archived. Several factors are considered by subject matter experts during the review process of a current career and technical education course. Based on the factors defined in the section the subject matter experts provide feedback on whether the course needs to continue to be included in the WECM database. Paragraph (4) ("Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance Revision") describes how the subject matter experts decide whether a course needs to be revised to stay current with industry-defined skills and knowledge. When a course is revised subject matter experts revise the career and technical education course to stay current with industry-defined skills and knowledge. Paragraph (5) ("Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance Workshop") is performed on a schedule cycle developed by the WECM advisory committee based on Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) code. Subject matter experts participate in the workshop to review career and technical education courses in their discipline. CTE courses are reviewed for currency with industry-defined skill and knowledge, then revised if necessary to meet industry-defined skill and knowledge. During a career and technical education course maintenance workshop a course may be added based on defined factors to meet industry-defined standards, or a course may be archived during a WECM maintenance workshop after review by subject matter experts and there is compelling evidence the course is no longer needed.
Rule 2.324, Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance Review, defines the review process cycle and factors to consider prior to scheduling a course maintenance review workshop. The schedule for course review is developed by the WECM Advisory Committee based on Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) code. The rule also lists additional factors that may elicit a course maintenance review workshop sooner than the scheduled cycle. The WECM Advisory Committee develops the schedule of career and technical education course maintenance review workshops based on the listed criteria. The rule also describes the participants for the course maintenance review workshop and defines the tasks the participants in the workshop must carry out.
Rule 2.325, Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance Revision, describes the process for revising a current course. Subject matter experts review each course in a discipline to see if the course meets current industry-defined skill and knowledge requirements. The rule describes which course elements the team of subject matter experts may recommend for revision and the process for adopting and presenting recommendations to the WECM Advisory Committee and Assistant Commissioner for final approval.
Rule 2.326, Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance Addition, describes the process for adding a course to the WECM database. After the review of all courses in a discipline subject matter experts may recommend the addition of a course based on factors/triggers listed in §2.324(b). The rule defines the required elements of a new course as listed in §2.329, as well as the process for the subject matter experts to adopt a recommendation for course addition, present the recommendation to the WECM Advisory Committee, and transmit the recommendation to the Assistant Commissioner for approval.
Rule 2.327, Career and Technical Education Course Maintenance Archival, describes how a course may be archived in the WECM database, removing it from the list of courses an institution may use. After the review of all courses in a discipline subject matter experts may recommend archival of a course to remove an unused, obsolete, or duplicate course from the WECM database. The recommendation from subject matter experts is based on a course duplicated in the WECM database, lack of usage based on the Coordinating Board course frequency data shared with subject matter experts on the discipline during a course maintenance review workshop or a course no longer meeting current industry-defined skill and knowledge. The rule allows for a phase-out period, defining the length of time an archived course will remain active in the WECM database and allowing the institutions time to remove the course from their program.
Rule 2.328, Career and Technical Education Course Approval, defines the Coordinating Board individual designated by the Commissioner for approval of each career and technical education course to be included in the Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM) database. The rule states the process, criteria and timeline for course approval or denial. Final approval of the course will result in the addition of the course to the WECM database, permitting the institution to teach the course without prior approval from the Coordinating Board.
Rule 2.329, Criteria for Proposed Course Approval, describes the criteria used by the Coordinating Board for determining whether to approve a course for inclusion in the WECM database. These criteria include evaluating whether an equivalent WECM course already exists, whether the course is counted in semester credit hours or continuing education units, and whether the necessary course description elements are complete.
Rule 2.330, Effective Date of Rules, defines the date of rule implementation.
No comments were received regarding adoption of the new rule.
The new section is adopted under Texas Education Code, Sections 61.0512, 130.001(3) and 130A.
The adopted new section affects Texas Education Code, Section 51.4034.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403395
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6344
SUBCHAPTER B. TRANSFER OF CREDIT, CORE CURRICULUM AND FIELD OF STUDY CURRICULA
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 4, Subchapter B, §§4.32, 4.33, and 4.35, regarding Field of Study Curricula, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 31, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3874). The rules will not be republished.
Section 4.32 amendments are designed to allow for two different framework structures for field of study curricula as approved by the Texas Transfer Advisory Committee (TTAC). Subsection (d) outlines semester credit hours for components of the standard field of study curriculum and subsection (e) outlines semester credit hour requirements for components of the alternative field of study curriculum approved by the TTAC.
Amendments to §§4.32(b)(2)(e), 4.33, and 4.35, are designed to change the name of what has previously been called the "alternative" Discipline Foundation Courses to "substitute" Discipline Foundation Courses as to not cause confusion by having an "alternative Field of Study" and "alternative Discipline Foundation Courses." The renamed substitute Discipline Foundation Courses apply only to each institution that requests approval for them. Institutional substitute discipline foundation courses must still be approved by the Commissioner of Higher Education as outlined in §4.35.
The following comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
Comment: The following comments were received from The University of Texas at Austin:
1. Removing the hours limits for DFC and Directed Electives opens the door to compel receiving institutions to accept and apply >12 hours and >6 hours respectively.
Response: The Coordinating Board appreciates this comment but disagrees that the rule removes the hour limits. The hour limits have not been removed for the discipline foundation courses or the directed electives but rather have been moved to separate sections. Subsection 4.32(c) states the required credit hours for the standard field of study curriculum and 4.32(d) states the required credit hours for the alternative field of study curriculum.
2. There isn't any universally agreed upon mechanism to indicate FoS courses on transcripts so receiving institutions don't know that a course is a FoS course and don't necessarily know what to do with it. FoS changes appear to offer two options for FoS, and they seem wildly different, which is confusing. The standard option limits the number of hours in a FoS to 20 whereas the alternative option appears to allow up to 36 hours of DFC and Directed Electives. It's unclear why the standard option doesn't give an hour number for Core courses but the alternative option limits the Core hours to 30. Receiving institutions are required to accept Core courses if they were taken prior to the student enrolling so it seems odd that any hour number is mentioned at all.
Response: The Coordinating Board appreciates this comment regarding transcripting of field of study courses, in order to implement new Texas Education Code, §61.834, sending institutions are required to indicate on a transcript if a student is field of study complete, core curriculum complete, and/or whether the student has completed a Texas Direct degree which consists of either the standard or alternative field of study curriculum and the core curriculum. The Coordinating Board also acknowledges that there are inconsistencies in how sending institutions are transcripting field of study curriculum courses as required by 4.32(b)(B) and (e) and will continue to work with institutions to improve this.
Regarding the two options and required hours of the core curriculum in field of study curricula, the rules identify two separate structures - one for the standard field of study curriculum, and one for a new alternative structure that can accommodate fields with more complex curricula. Consistent feedback from faculty in several field of study subcommittees indicated that the standard structure is not compatible with some disciplines, such as biology or engineering that spread the discipline specific curriculum across four years, rather than other disciplines where students can complete the 42-credit hour core in the first two years. For the standard core curriculum, faculty subcommittees identify any required core curriculum courses that need to be completed as part of the field of study, which may vary by discipline. This is why there is not a single specified number of core semester credit hours for the standard field of study curriculum. The alternative field of study curriculum has a limit of 30 semester credit hours for the core to allow for more major-specific content to be taken in the first two years. The transfer student would then complete the core curriculum after transferring to the receiving institution.
The Coordinating Board recognizes that complexity and novelty of the revised Texas Transfer Framework and in the coming months will be providing additional guidance and communication materials on the Framework, fields of study, transcripting and other frequently asked questions related to transfer in the state of Texas.
The amendments are adopted under Texas Education Code, §61.823, which requires the Board to adopt Field of Study Curricula for certain fields of study or academic disciplines.
The adopted amendments affect Texas Education Code, §§61.821 and 61.823.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403396
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 31, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
SUBCHAPTER D. RURAL RESIDENT PHYSICAN GRANT PROGRAM
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 10, Subchapter D, §§10.90 - 10.98, concerning the administration of the Rural Resident Physician Grant Program established by House Bill 1065, 86th Texas Legislature. Sections 10.90, 10.92 - 10.94 and 10.96 - 10.98 are adopted with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 31, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3877) and will be republished. Sections 10.91 and 10.95 are adopted without changes and will not be republished.
This new subchapter establishes rules related to administration of the Rural Residency Physician Grant Program. The Coordinating Board used negotiated rulemaking to develop these rules. The Coordinating Board will make reports of negotiated rulemaking committees available upon request.
Texas Education Code, Chapter 58A, Subchapter E, establishes the Rural Residency Physician Grant Program and authorizes the Coordinating Board to adopt rules for implementation. The rules outline the application and evaluation processes, reporting, and other requirements for eligible entities to receive funding under the grant program.
Rule 10.90, Purpose, establishes the purpose for the subchapter is to administer the Rural Resident Physician Grant Program which provides funding for the establishment or expansion of graduate medical education programs in rural Texas.
Rule 10.91, Authority, establishes authority for this subchapter is found in Texas Education Code, §58A.081, which grants the Coordinating Board with authority to adopt rules to administer the grant program.
Rule 10.92, Definitions, defines terms related to administration of the grant program.
Rule 10.93, Eligibility, establishes eligibility criteria to receive grant funding.
Rule 10.94, Application Process, describes main criteria that must be included in the grant application, including the number of residency positions created or maintained, budget, documentation on existing staffing and resources to support new residency positions, and evidence of support from the institution and community.
Rule 10.95, Evaluation of Applications, establishes selection criteria for awards.
Rule 10.96, Grant Awards, establishes how grant funding is awarded and defines allowable expenditures. Grantees may expend grant funds on resident physician salaries or other direct costs to create or maintain the residency position(s).
Rule 10.97, Reporting, establishes reporting requirements for grantees.
Rule 10.98, Additional Requirements, establishes criteria for returning unspent funds at the end of the grant term.
Subsequent to the posting of the rules in the Texas Register, the following changes are incorporated into the adopted rules.
Section 10.90 is amended to remove the limitation of the grant program only applying to new graduate medical education programs, and language is amended to include "positions", in addition to programs, in rural areas. These amendments are made to reflect the consensus of the negotiated rulemaking committee more accurately.
Section 10.92 is amended in the following ways:
The definition of (1) Rural has been changed to "A location that is eligible for Federal Office of Rural Health Policy grant programs." This amendment is due to an error in the definition published during the proposal comment period and the new definition accurately reflects the decision of the negotiated rulemaking committee.
The definition of (2) Rural Training Tracks is amended to fix a typo.
Section 10.93 is amended to remove reference to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), and to clarify that the Coordinating Board will work with applicants to confirm eligible sites. The amendments also clarify that newly created resident physician sites are eligible.
Section 10.94 is amended to clarify that institutional support should be documented through the individual referenced in §10.94(b)(3).
Section 10.96 is amended based on stakeholder comment to award remaining funds to "other eligible applicants". The amendment aligns the use of funds with statutory language.
Section 10.97 is amended to replace incorrect reporting requirements published in the proposed rules. The amended section streamlines reporting requirements and more accurately reflects the consensus of the negotiated rulemaking committee.
Section 10.98 is amended to include a requirement that after notification to the Coordinating Board of a vacated residency position, an awardee has sixty days to fill the vacated position. Additional non-substantive amendments were also made to section language for consistency and clarity.
The following comments were received regarding the adoption of the new rules.
Comment regarding §10.92(1), Rural, received from the Texas Academy of Family Physicians (TAFP): "The program's enabling statute states that the THECB shall award competitive grants to "encourage the creation of new graduate medical education positions in rural and nonmetropolitan areas, with particular emphasis on the creation of rural training tracks." Moreover, the statute limits grant funding "until such time that a program becomes eligible for federal dollars. With these provisions in mind, we recommend aligning the definition of rural within the proposed rules with that used by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for purposes of rural training track federal funding. CMS defines rural as "any area outside an urban area," with urban being any area defined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as a Metropolitan Statistical Area or a Metropolitan division (in the case where a Metropolitan Statistical Area is divided into Metropolitan Divisions). By aligning definitions, it will be easier for grantees to pursue the federal funds necessary to sustain programs longer term."
TAFP recommended adding "A non-metropolitan statistical area or non-metropolitan area as defined by the Office of Management and Budget" to the definition of "Rural."
Response: An incorrect version of the definition for rural was published in the proposed rules and based upon the consensus of the negotiated rule making committee the definition has been amended.
Comment regarding 10.92(1), Rural, received from the Texas Hospital Association (THA): "In proposed 10 TAC §10.92(1), the definition of the term "rural" is unclear and unnecessarily reliant on federal shortage designations that may limit the eligibility of many potential applicants. Health Professional Shortage Areas (HPSAs) and Medically Underserved Areas and Populations (MUA/Ps) are federal designations assigned by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) to implement a specific set of federal programs. Such designations are not limited to rural areas and, in fact, portions of Texas' largest cities have been designated as HPSAs and/or MUA/Ps. Moreover, these designations may be fleeting, as HRSA regularly updates the data on which designations are reliant and then may withdraw these designations. Finally, the Texas Primary Care Office at the Department of State Health Services, the office with responsibility for proposing new designations to HRSA, may not actively seek new HPSA or MUA/P designations, but rather rely on external requests to do so. This transient trait threatens rural residency program stability and sustainability under the proposed definition. Thus, THA suggests THECB adopt an alternate definition of rural that is longer-lasting and appropriate for the purposes of the program."
Response: An incorrect version of the definition for rural was published in the proposed rules and based upon the consensus of the negotiated rule making committee the definition has been amended.
Comment regarding §10.92(1), Rural, and §10.93, Eligibility, received from the Texas Medical Association (TMA): "TMA has significant concerns about the proposed definition of "rural" in proposed §10.92 and use of the term "non-metropolitan" in proposed Sections 10.92 and 10.93. While there are many definitions of rural in Texas law, the proposed definition of "rural" is novel, and is not expected to be readily understood. The references to Health Professional Shortage Area (HPSA) and Medically Underserved Area (MUA) designations in the definition of rural are unclear as to their purpose, origin, and application in administering the program.
Further:
1) As the national accrediting body for residency programs, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) is not recognized as the source for defining either rural or non-metropolitan areas; HPSAs; or MUAs. At the time that an application for grant funding is submitted in response to the Board's request for application (RFA), rural residency positions may not (yet) have been accredited by ACGME.
2) The federal definition of rural as established by the Executive Office of Management and Budget is a commonly recognized and consistent source. As an example, this definition is what has been used by the Texas Department of State Health Services for decades in identifying rural areas.
3) The federal government adopted HPSA and MUA designations to meet different purposes, and to qualify specific areas for certain federal and state benefit programs.
Primary care HPSAs are intended to identify geographic areas with a recognized shortage of primary care physicians. In contrast, MUAs do not identify physician shortage areas but more broadly identify degrees of "medical underservice" for geographic areas. The ratio of physicians to population is but one of four parts of the composite MUA score. Three of the four parts are focused on demographic and health status factors that were determined to be predictive of the need for medical services: percentage of elderly persons, poverty level, and infant mortality rate. MUA designations are not used to determine eligibility for programs intended to build the physician workforce, such as the National Health Service Corps or the Board's State Physician Education Loan Repayment Program. Notably, HPSA and MUA designations are not considerations for Medicare GME funding for rural training tracks. For the definition of rural, it is critically important that positions created in Texas through the Rural Resident Physician Grant Program are able to qualify for Medicare GME funding by meeting the federal criteria for rural training tracks. It is therefore critically important that the state definition aligns with the federal definition of rural."
TMA recommend addressing a typo in §10.92(2), adding a reference to the Executive Office of Management and Budget in place of the reference to the Accreditation Council for Graduation Medical Education in the definition of §10.92(1), and changing "physician site" to "training site" and removing reference to the Accreditation Council for Graduation Medical Education in §10.93.
Response: For §10.92(2), the typo has been corrected at adoption. For §10.92(1), an incorrect version of the definition for rural was published in the proposed rules and based upon the consensus of the negotiated rule making committee the definition has been amended. For §10.93, the Coordinating Board agrees with the recommended edit and has amended the rules upon adoption.
Comment regarding §10.93(b), Eligibility, received from the Texas Academy of Family Physicians (TAFP): TAFP recommended adding a reference to the definition of §10.92(1), "Rural," in §10.93(b).
Response: Because rural is already defined in §10.92 for the purpose of these rules, an additional reference to the definition is not needed.
Comment regarding §10.94(a), Application Process, received from the Texas Academy of Family Physicians (TAFP): "TAFP respectfully objects to establishing a limit of two applications per grantee within the rules. Statutorily, there is no basis for this requirement, though the Academy recognizes that state appropriations for the grants will determine how many applications THECB ultimately funds during any given biennium. We recommend removing this provision and allowing programs to submit as many applications as they believe their programs can support, which will vary year-to-year. In so doing, this change also will help THECB quantify the level of community need, which will be useful in developing future legislative appropriation requests. As specified within §10.96, Grant Awards, THECB will retain discretion to limit awards within available funds."
Response: Limiting a grantee to two applications allows the Coordinating Board to set the number of grants to be awarded each year, subject to available funds, and allows the Coordinating Board to more equitable distribute funds across programs and the state.
Comment regarding §10.94, Application Process, received from the Texas Medical Association (TMA): "TMA respectfully shares the following concerns and recommendations regarding subsections (a) and (c)(2) of proposed Section 10.94, relating to the application process.
First, TMA recommends that subsection (a) of proposed Section 10.94 be deleted, such that there is no cap on the number of applications that an eligible entity may submit. TMA strongly questions the arbitrary nature of setting any cap in rule and requests clarification on why the Board has proposed a limit of two applications.
Texas is a diverse state and each of the state's 16 medical schools has a distinct mission. Not all medical schools will have an interest or the required expertise to sponsor residency training in a rural setting. It is expected that the medical schools with a particular mission to prepare physicians for practice in rural Texas will have a greater interest in the grant opportunities. This is indicated by a review of the history of rural training tracks in the state. Only a few Texas medical schools have sponsored rural training tracks, to date.
Currently, one public Texas medical school sponsors four (80%) of the state's five rural training track programs. This is reflective of the heavy emphasis on training physicians for practice in rural Texas at that particular medical school. There are no indications that the mission of that school is likely to change and based on the history, it is reasonable to assume that school will continue to play a dominant role in sponsoring rural training tracks in the future. There is the potential for that school to have a greater need as well as greater resources for more than two rural residency positions per application cycle. The number of rural counties in Texas is not expected to change in the near future and at this time, a preponderance of rural areas is concentrated within the rural service areas of a few medical schools.
An arbitrary cap could have the effect of limiting the most qualified residency program sponsors from fully participating in residency training. This would diminish the potential impact on rural physician shortage areas, the ability of those schools to meet their specific rural missions, and the ability of the grant program to successfully meet its objectives.
Should more applications than available funds be submitted, it is important that reasonable prioritization criteria are in place to allow for the selection of the most qualified applicants.
Next, TMA requests that the Board clarify the reference to "type of residency position" in subsection (c)(2) of proposed Section 10.94. Particularly, TMA asks that the Board distinguish whether this refers to the medical training discipline for the residency program, such as family medicine, or the postgraduate year of training."
Response: For §10.94(a), limiting a grantee to two applications allows the Coordinating Board to set the number of grants to be awarded each year, subject to available funds, and allows the Coordinating Board to more equitable distribute funds across programs and the state. For §10.94(c)(2), the Coordinating Board thanks the organization for the comment and agrees to amend to provide clarity.
Comment regarding §10.94(a), Application Process, received from the Texas Hospital Association (THA): "The proposed 10 TAC C10.94(a) establishes a limit on the maximum number of applications an eligible entity can submit. While there may be value in ensuring that a diverse set of institutions receive grant funding, establishing such a limitation in rule unnecessarily limits THECB as it administers the program. Should, for example, there exist a dearth of eligible entities submitting qualifying applications in any given year, THECB would unnecessarily constrain the state's rural residency program growth by prohibiting potential additional applications due to this arbitrary limitation. Rather, THA recommends that the finalized rules indicate the Request for Applications (RFA) will be the vehicle through which the agency will establish selection criteria among qualifying applications, and the RFA might subsequently indicate that no eligible institution should exceed a certain number of awards if there exist other qualifying applicants that have not received an award. (As an aside, the RFA abbreviation is used throughout this subchapter, but is not defined. THECB may wish to add the term to 10 TAC §10.92.)."
Response: Limiting a grantee to two applications allows the Coordinating Board to set the number of grants to be awarded each year, subject to available funds, and allows the Coordinating Board to more equitable distribute funds across programs and the state.
Comment regarding §10.94(c)(2), received from the Texas Hospital Association (THA): "In proposed rule 10 TAC §10.94(c)(2), there appears the term "type of residency position." In its use, the referenced typology is unnamed, resulting in confusion around the intent of the rule. If "type of residency position" is meant to signify the medical specialty of the position, the rule should say so."
Response: The Coordinating Board thanks the organization for the comment and agrees to amend to provide clarity.
Comment regarding §10.95(c), Evaluation, received from the Texas Academy of Family Physicians (TAFP): "TAFP respectfully objects to prioritizing funds for existing programs. House Bill 1 (2023), Rider 63, Article III, states that funds shall be used "to award grants for the creation of new (emphasis added) graduate medical education positions in rural and non-metropolitan areas..." While the statute authorizes funding for new or expanded locations, we believe the intent of the rider was to ensure funding for this biennium prioritized new programs, which will support geographically and culturally diverse training opportunities."
Response: The Coordinating Board's rulemaking authority is derived from the statute. The budgetary rider does not impart rulemaking authority.
Comment regarding §10.95(b), Evaluation, received from the Texas Medical Association (TMA): "Section 58A.081(b) of the Texas Education Code states: "The board shall establish criteria for the grant program in consultation with one or more physicians, including a physician who practices in a rural area of this state, teaching hospitals, medical schools, and independent physician residency programs, and with other persons considered appropriate by the board." There is no mention of this section in the rules. Importantly, this process affords representation of the state's leaders in rural residency training in the development of the grant program criteria.
TMA opposes the prioritization of existing rural residency programs or tracks in proposed Section 10.95(c) for several reasons.
First, Section 58A.081(a) of the Texas Education Code specifies that:
[T]he board shall administer the Rural Resident Physician Grant Program as a competitive grant program to encourage the creation of new graduate medical education positions in rural and nonmetropolitan areas, with particular emphasis on the creation of rural training tracks. The board shall award grants to new or expanded physician residency programs at teaching hospitals and other appropriate health care entities according to the program criteria established under this section. (Emphasis added.) Notably, this statute does not prioritize existing rural residency programs or tracks over new rural residency programs or tracks.
Additionally, proposed Section 10.95(c) does not take into account that rural training tracks are most often a single residency position per year. It is the nature of these training programs to be exceedingly small, largely due to the limited size of the patient population and the corresponding ability of the residency program to meet the accreditation standards for the size and mix of the patient population as established by the ACGME. Of the five existing rural training track programs in place in Texas today, four programs (80%) have a single resident per year.
And further, the special CMS rules that enable rural/urban hospitals that co-sponsor rural training tracks to qualify for additions to their existing Medicare GME funding caps limit this special provision to new rural training tracks. Once CMS sets the cap in Medicare GME funding under this special provision for rural training tracks, any addition of residency positions would generally be ineligible for Medicare GME funding.
For these reasons, it is not practical in many cases to expand existing programs beyond a single resident per year and placing a priority on expansions over new programs could prevent the latter from qualifying for Medicare GME payments."
Response: The rules were developed through the negotiated rulemaking process. The negotiated rulemaking committee included the stakeholders set forth in §58A.081(b). The committee discussed and agreed on the approach set forth. The rules do not limit eligibility to expansion. New programs are eligible to apply and receive funding. If it is not practical for an existing program to expand, then there is additional grant funding available for new programs.
Comment regarding §10.96, Grant Awards, received from the Texas Medical Association (TMA): "Proposed Section 10.96(f) provides that the Board will award any grant funds returned pursuant to proposed Section 10.98 "equitably to current awardees." TMA recommends that the Board instead establish a process for assessing the current grant funding needs of eligible applicants who previously applied for funding, as this would expand the pool of potential eligible recipients of the redistributed funds to include eligible applicants that potentially did not receive grant funding during the respective grant cycle. Rather than an "equitable" distribution, it is important for the recouped funds to be distributed based on current needs. Such process would be consistent with Section 58A.081(h) of the Texas Education Code, which requires the Board to "use money forfeited under Subsection (g) to award grants to other eligible applicants."
TMA recommended replacing "equitably to current awardees" in 10.98(f) with "other eligible applicants for the respective RFA."
Response: The Coordinating Board thanks the organization for the comment and agrees to amend.
Comment regarding 10.96, Grant Awards, received from the Texas Hospital Association (THA): "The word "equitably" is used in proposed rule 10 TAC 10.96(f), but its definition is similarly unclear. Equitably, here, could be read to mean that each current awardee would receive an equal share of any returned funds. Alternately, it might also indicate that the current awardees would receive a share of funds proportional to their original grant awards, or that THECB might rely on other factors in determining an equitable distribution. Once more, the agency should restate its actual intent in plain language."
Response: The Coordinating Board thanks the organization for the comment and agrees to amend.
Comments regarding compliance with statute received from the Texas Hospital Association (THA): "Texas Education Code §58A.081(h) specifies that THECB "shall use money forfeited under [§58A.081(g)] to award grants to other eligible applicants [emphasis added]." However, the proposed rule would direct these funds to "current awardees." THA believes that statutory language indicates that forfeited funds should be awarded as grants - not supplemental funds - to eligible applicants who did not initially receive funding. This reading supports state both state and agency goals in that directing the money to current awardees does not serve to expand the number of rural residency programs in the state, nor does it ensure a diverse set of eligible applicants receive funding, as THECB presumably intends through the proposed limitation on applications addressed above. THA recommends that the proposed rule language is amended to align with statute, and that THECB award any forfeited funds to other eligible applicants who might then initiate an additional program."
Response: The Coordinating Board thanks the organization for the comment and agrees to amend.
Comments regarding compliance with statute received from the Texas Hospital Association (THA): "Finally, THA would stress its interest in THECB faithfully implementing Texas Education Code §58A.081(b), which requires the agency to consult with teaching hospitals and independent physician residency programs when establishing criteria for the grant program through the RFA process. As noted in the second paragraph of this letter, THA and Texas hospitals are strong supporters of the agency's many programs supporting the development of the health care workforce and shares THECB's goals of ensuring all of Texas has access to high-quality care. We believe our members' knowledge will only serve to maximize the impact of this important program."
Response: The rules were developed through the negotiated rulemaking process. The negotiated rulemaking committee included the stakeholders set forth in §58A.081(b). The committee discussed and agreed on the approach set forth. The rules do not limit eligibility to expansion. New programs are eligible to apply and receive funding. If it is not practical for an existing program to expand, then there is additional grant funding available for new programs.
The new subchapter is adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 58A.081, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to administer the Rural Resident Physician Grant Program and adopt program.
The adopted new sections affect Texas Education Code, Section 58A.081.
§10.90.Purpose.
The purpose of this subchapter is to administer the Rural Resident Physician Grant Program to provide and oversee grants for the establishment or expansion of graduate medical education programs or positions in rural and non-metropolitan areas to help meet the health-care needs of rural communities in Texas.
§10.92.Definitions.
Definitions set forth in Texas Education Code, chapter 58A (relating to Programs Supporting Graduate Medical Education) are hereby incorporated into this rule. The following words and terms, when used in this subchapter, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.
(1) Rural--A location that is eligible for Federal Office of Rural Health Policy grant programs.
(2) Rural Training Tracks--As defined in rules and regulations of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in 42 CFR §413.79(k), is an ACGME-accredited program in which all or some residents/fellows gain both urban and rural experience with more than half of the education and training for the applicable resident(s)/fellow(s) taking place in a rural area.
§10.93.Eligibility.
(a) To be eligible to apply for and receive grant funding an entity must:
(1) be a new or expanded physician residency program at teaching hospitals and other appropriate health care entities;
(2) meet any other eligibility criteria set forth in Texas Education Code, §58A.081; and
(3) have or create a resident physician site in a rural or nonmetropolitan area.
(b) Eligible sites will be confirmed by Coordinating Board staff, in cooperation with the applicant.
§10.94.Application Process.
(a) Unless otherwise specified in the RFA, an eligible entity may submit a maximum of two (2) applications.
(b) To qualify for funding consideration, an eligible applicant must submit an application to the Coordinating Board. Each application shall:
(1) be submitted electronically in a format specified in the RFA;
(2) adhere to the grant program requirements contained in the RFA; and
(3) be submitted with approval of the President or Chief Executive Officer or designee on or before the day and time specified by the RFA.
(c) Submitted applications shall include:
(1) The number of residency positions that will be created or maintained if grant funds are awarded;
(2) A budget that includes the requested grant amount broken down by resident, resident year, and residency specialty;
(3) documentation that an applicant's existing staffing and infrastructure is sufficient to support new or maintained residency positions and satisfy applicable accreditation requirements;
(4) detailed plans on how the new or maintained residency positions will produce physicians who are prepared for and plan to practice in rural areas;
(5) Evidence of support for residency training by both the institution as documented by the designated institutional official as identified in subsection (b)(3) of this section and the community; and
(6) any other requirements as set forth in the RFA.
§10.96.Grant Awards.
(a) The amount of funding available for the rural resident physician grant program is dependent on the legislative appropriation for the program for each biennial state budget. The Coordinating Board will provide award levels and estimated number of awards in the RFA.
(b) Each grant award shall be subject to Coordinating Board approval pursuant to §1.16 of this title (relating to Contracts, Including Grants, for Materials and/or Services).
(c) The Commissioner of Higher Education may adjust the size of a grant award to best fulfill the purpose of the RFA.
(d) The Coordinating Board may advance a grant award to a grantee.
(e) The Coordinating Board will first award grants for all residency positions awarded a grant under this subchapter in the preceding year before awarding a grant for a residency position that did not receive a grant in the preceding year, provided that the applicable grant recipient from the preceding year meets eligibility requirements for a new grant award and complied with all grant and application requirements set forth in this subchapter and the terms of the grant previously awarded. The Coordinating Board shall award all remaining funds pursuant to the evaluation criteria set forth in §10.95 of this subchapter (relating to Evaluation).
(f) The Coordinating Board will award any grant funds returned pursuant to §10.98 of this subchapter (relating to Additional Requirements) to other eligible applicants for the respective RFA.
(g) A grantee shall only expend grant funds on the salary of the resident physician and other direct costs that are necessary and reasonable to create or maintain the residency position as stated in grantee's budget.
§10.97.Reporting Requirements.
Grantees must file program, expenditure and resident reports in the format required by the Coordinating Board by the deadlines set forth in the RFA. Grantees shall provide information that includes, but is not limited to, the following:
(1) An overview of outcomes of residency positions and information on the characteristics of the program.
(2) Evidence of whether the residency positions funded by the grant were filled.
(3) Demonstration of addressing the needs of underserved rural communities or regions.
(4) Any current plans to continue the rural residency position(s) or program after the end of the grant term.
(5) An expenditures report detailing how funds were used over the course of the grant program pursuant to §10.96(h) of this subchapter (relating to Grant Awards).
§10.98.Additional Requirements.
(a) Cancellation or Suspension of Grant Solicitations. The Coordinating Board has the right to reject all applications and cancel a grant solicitation at any point.
(b) Forfeiture and Return of Funds.
(1) The grantee shall return any award funds remaining unspent at the end of the grant term as set forth in the RFA or Notice of Grant Award (NOGA) to the Coordinating Board within sixty (60) days.
(2) The grantee shall fill all funded residency positions no later than the first reporting deadline as set forth in the RFA. A grantee forfeits and must return, if grant funds were received, a proportionate share of the grant award for each unfilled residency position as determined by the Coordinating Board.
(3) A grantee shall notify the Coordinating Board within thirty (30) days of any funded residency positions becoming vacant.
(4) The grantee shall have sixty (60) days from notification to the Coordinating Board about the vacated position to refill the residency position.
(5) A grantee forfeits and shall return, if grant funds were received, a proportionate share of the grant award for each unfilled residency position as determined by the Coordinating Board.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403397
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 31, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 10, Subchapter E, Professional Nursing Shortage Reduction Program. Section 10.110 is adopted with changes to the proposed rule text as published in the May 31, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3879). The rule will be republished. Sections 10.111 - 10.117 are adopted without changes and will not be republished.
The adopted rules will replace the existing Professional Nursing Shortage Reduction Program rules currently in Chapter 22, Subchapter S, which will be repealed in future rulemaking. The adopted rules clarify grant award requirements based on statute and provide alignment with budgetary provisions included in rider. The Coordinating Board used negotiated rulemaking to develop these rules. The Coordinating Board will make reports of negotiated rulemaking committees available upon request.
Rule 10.110, Purpose, establishes the purpose for the subchapter is to administer the Professional Nursing Shortage Reduction Program.
Rule 10.111, Authority, establishes authority for this subchapter is found in Texas Education Code, §§61.9621 - 61.9628, which grants the Coordinating Board with authority to adopt rules to administer the Professional Nursing Shortage Reduction Program.
Rule 10.112, Definitions, defines terms related to administration of the grant program.
Rule 10.113, Eligibility, establishes eligibility criteria for grant funding. Language clarifies eligibility of existing and new professional nursing programs.
Rule 10.114, Application Process, contains requirements for application submission and funding increases.
Rule 10.115, Evaluation of Applications, establishes selection criteria for awards.
Rule 10.116, Grant Awards, establishes how grant funding is appropriated and distributed. This section clarifies allowable and reasonable costs associated with the award.
Rule 10.117, Reporting, establishes reporting requirements for grantees.
Subsequent to the posting of the rules in the Texas Register, the following changes are incorporated into the adopted rule.
Section 10.110, Purpose, is amended to remove unclear language in the section in response to comment from the Texas Hospital Association.
The following comments were received regarding the adoption of the new rules.
Comment regarding §10.110, Purpose, received from the Texas Hospital Association: "THA seeks clarity on how THECB intends to define the word "type" as used in proposed rule 10 TAC §10.110. All nurses are registered nurses upon initial licensure. While some nurses may provide care in a specialized area of medicine (pediatrics, women's health, intensive care, etc.) for a majority of their careers, we are unaware of nursing education programs or degrees that allow registered nurses to specialize. As such, we simply would like to understand THECB's interpretation of the word "type" in hopes that this is not simply a rule which restates the statute."
Response: The Coordinating Board agrees with the comment and amends rule text by striking "both in number and type" from §10.110.
Comment regarding §10.114, Application Process, received from Texas Hospital Association: "THA recommends that the THECB revise proposed §10.114(c)(1) to include elements related to classroom space and clinical slots needed to properly accommodate the education of the additional enrollments or graduates using NSRP funds. [...]
Section 61.9623(a)(4), Education Code requires that grant funds awarded to increase enrollments must be contingent on the professional nursing program's ability to have the necessary classroom space and clinical slots available to properly educate these additional nursing students. According to the Teaching Hospitals of Texas, citing a 2021 report by the Texas Center for Nursing Workforce Studies, ‘associate degree nursing students receive an average of 843 clinical hours of training while bachelor's level nursing students receive, on average 908 hours of clinical training. Acute care sites, including hospitals, are the primary sites for nursing students' clinical training,,,.' Since most clinical training takes place in hospitals, it is important that professional nursing programs ensure that the necessary clinical spots are secured and available to accommodate training these additional students at Texas hospitals and other health care facilities. ‘Lack of clinical training capacity and clinical preceptors are identified by numerous sources as the primary obstacles to growing Texas' nurse workforce.' We urge the THECB to revise and improve the rule per our recommendation."
THA recommended adding language to include secured classroom space and clinical slot capacity in the grant application.
Response: The grant is contingent upon the professional nursing program's ability to have the necessary classroom space and clinical slots. The statute does not authorize the Coordinating Board to make a determination as to classroom space and clinical slots prior to the award of the grant. However, the Coordinating Board could request such information from the grantee in required reporting.
Comment regarding §10.116, Grant Awards, received from Texas Hospital Association: "THA recommends that the THECB revise proposed §10.116(g)(2) to include the specific statutory allowance to use NSRP funds on innovative mechanisms to recruit and retain Spanish-speaking and bilingual students. [...]
"The use of grant fund requirements listed in proposed §10.116(g) are restricted to those set forth in Section 61.9623, Education Code. Section 61.9623(a)(1)(c) requires that grant funds are expended exclusively on costs related to ... ‘encouraging innovation in the recruitment and retention of students, including the recruitment and retention of Spanish-speaking and bilingual students[.]' The statute does not limit the use of funds solely on ‘evidenced-based' practices, but ‘evidenced-based practices' could be included under an ‘innovation' umbrella. We note that the legislature was focused on innovation, because - as all stakeholders are aware - current practices of recruiting and retaining nursing students are not working. We also think it important to include criteria that specifically allow for the recruitment of students who speak one or more foreign languages. As the Texas population grows increasingly diverse, foreign language skills are greatly needed in our hospitals amongst our health care workforce. We encourage the THECB to incorporate these important skills in its proposed rule for use of fund allowances."
THA recommended the inclusion of the term "innovative" and specific language about the recruitment of Spanish speaking and bilingual students.
Response: The Coordinating Board thanks the organization for the comment but does not agree that this language is necessary to add to the rule.
Comment regarding implementation of General Appropriations Act budgetary rider, submitted by the Texas Hospital Association: "THA requests clarity and information from the THECB on how the proposed rules will implement the appropriations requirements set forth in Article III, Rider 26 for the NSRP. For example, it is unclear from the proposed rules how the THECB will a) ensure allocation of ‘up to 50 percent in each fiscal year of the biennium and any unexpended amounts to community colleges,' b) ensure grant funds will be distributed in an equitable manner based on the total number of doctoral level and master's in nursing education students graduating from a program each year, c) ensure institutions that do spend funds on nonqualifying expenditures, or do not spend funds within the designated timeframes, will return those funds to the THECB, and d) ensure that nonresident students enrolled in online professional nursing programs while residing outside of Texas will be used to calculate program awards. THA notes the THECB acknowledged that the purpose of proposing these new rules (and repealing current rules at a later date) is to ‘provide alignment with budgetary provisions included in rider.' THA looks forward to the THECB's explanations on how and which portions of the proposed rules will address the rider's requirements."
Response: The Coordinating Board's rulemaking authority is derived from the statute. The budgetary rider does not impart rulemaking authority. The Coordinating Board acknowledges that the reference to the rider was an error in the introductory language of the proposed rules.
The new sections are adopted under Texas Education Code, Sections 61.9621 - 61.9628, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to administer the Professional Nursing Shortage Reduction Program, supervise institutional reporting requirements, and adopt program rules.
The adopted new sections affect Texas Education Code, Sections 61.9621 - 61.9628.
§10.110.Purpose.
The purpose of this subchapter is to administer the Professional Nursing Shortage Reduction Program to provide and oversee grants to eligible entities to meet the needs of the state of Texas for initially registered nurses.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403398
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 31, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6182
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 10, Subchapter TT, §§10.910 - 10.917, Texas Working Off-Campus: Reinforcing Knowledge and Skills (WORKS) Internship Program, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3088). The rules will not be republished.
The adopted new rules provide clarity of program processes and requirements. The new rules also provide closer alignment to the statutory language, support efficiencies in program implementation by the workforce, and help to increase program participation among employers and students.
Rule 10.910, Authority and Purpose, the Texas Working Off-Campus: Reinforcing Knowledge and Skills (WORKS) Internship Program is authorized by TEC, Chapter 56, Subchapter E-1, §§56.0851 - 56.0857, with the purpose of funding Texas student internships, with the intention of enabling students employed through the program to explore career options, become career ready, strengthen marketable skills, and attend institutions of higher education.
Rule 10.911, Definitions, provides clarity of the words and terms that are integral to understanding the administration of the rules.
Rule 10.912, Employer Eligibility and Participation Requirements, defines the employer eligibility and participation requirements, which encompass the following: must be a private nonprofit, for-profit, or governmental entity, have an agreement with the Coordinating Board, employ students within their career interest in nonpartisan and nonsectarian activities, and identify the marketable skills to be gained from the internship. The internship positions are to supplement and not supplant normal positions, full wages and benefits are to be covered by the eligible employer and only eligible wages are to be submitted to the Coordinating Board for reimbursement. Eligible employers must demonstrate their capacity to implement the program and follow the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI (Public Law 88-353) in avoiding discrimination in admission or employment. Public or private institutions of higher education and career schools are not eligible to participate in the Texas Works program.
Rule 10.913, Employer Agreement, the employer agreement defines the roles and responsibilities, base wages, Coordinating Board reimbursement amounts, minimum work hours, employment laws, and defines the reporting terms and conditions. This agreement is to be held between the Coordinating Board and the eligible employer.
Rule 10.914, Employer Reimbursement, defines the employer reimbursement approach. Employer reimbursement is to take place upon the completion of reporting requirements per the program guidelines.
Rule 10.915, Qualified Internship Opportunity, defines a qualified internship opportunity. A qualified internship must meet the following components: marketable skills are to be identified, internships must be paid, a minimum of 96 hours in length, are not to be political or sectarian, no more than 25 percent of the internship work can be administrative and no more than 50 percent of the eligible employer's workforce may be interns. Federal work-study may not be utilized towards the internship hourly wages and the Coordinating Board sets the maximum number of internship opportunities per eligible employer. In the case that there are insufficient funds to award all selected eligible students, program guidelines will define the priority determination.
Rule 10.916, Student Eligibility, defines program student eligibility which consist of the following: students must be a resident of Texas, be enrolled as a half-time student or within an internship course either prior to or during the semester of the internship period, as an undergraduate student. Texas Works students must be high school graduates and may not participate in more than one Texas Works internship at a time. Additional eligibility criteria are defined within the program guidelines.
Rule 10.917, Records and Retention, defines records retention stipulations for which eligible employers must maintain records and accounts of all transactions, student placements, benefits, and wages for a minimum of seven (7) years. Records are to be made available upon request.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the new rules.
The new sections are adopted under Texas Education Code, Chapter 56, Subchapter E-1, §§56.0851 - 56.0857, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules necessary concerning the Texas Working Off-Campus: Reinforcing Knowledge and Skills (WORKS) Internship Program, to enforce program requirements, conditions, and limitations provided by Subchapter E-1. In addition, rules are to be adopted to ensure compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI (Pub. L. No. 88-352), which concerns nondiscrimination in admissions or employment.
The adopted new sections affects Texas Education Code, Chapter 56, Subchapter E-1, §§56.0851 - 56.0857. The existing Texas Works Internship Program rules, Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Chapter 21, Student Services, Subchapter W, Sections 21.700 - 21.707, are being repealed in a separate rule action.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403400
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6267
SUBCHAPTER Q. FINANCIAL AID FOR SWIFT TRANSFER (FAST) PROGRAM
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 13, Subchapter Q, §§13.501 - 13.503, Financial Aid for Swift Transfer (FAST) Program, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2902). The rules will not be republished.
The amendments align definitions in the FAST program with those used in Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 4, Subchapter D, concerning Dual Credit Partnerships Between Secondary Schools and Texas Public Colleges.
Rule 13.501 is amended to align the definitions of "career and technical education course," "credit," "dual credit course," "equivalent of a semester credit hour," and "semester credit hour." The definition of "school district" is added. These changes are adopted to ensure greater alignment between the definitions regarding dual credit enrollment occurring through the FAST program and the definitions regarding the requirements of dual credit partnerships. The definition of "charter school" is removed because the new definition of "school district" includes charter schools. This alignment of definitions does not change the underlying structure of the FAST Program.
Rules 13.502 and §13.503 are amended to align terminology in these sections with the above definitions. These amendments are adopted based on Texas Education Code, Section 28.0095(j), which directs the Coordinating Board to adopt rules as necessary to implement the FAST Program.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendments are adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 28.0095, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules as necessary to implement the FAST Program.
The adopted amendments affect Texas Education Code, Sections 28.0095 and 48.308.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403401
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6365
19 TAC §§13.522 - 13.525, 13.528, 13.529
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 13, Subchapter R, §§13.522 - 13.525, 13.528, and 13.529, State Public Junior College Finance Program Reporting, Audit, and Overallocation, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 31, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3882). The rules will not be republished.
The amendments clarify timelines related to ameliorating errors in data reporting and will align subchapter R with forthcoming rules the Coordinating Board intends to adopt.
Section 13.522, Definitions, amends an existing definition for "Data Reporting Error" and adds a new definition for "Fundable Certified Data." These two definition changes will clarify elements of the timeline for making determinations of data reporting errors and ameliorating those errors: the window for determining a data reporting error has occurred will start on May 1 of the preceding fiscal year, which is the date fundable certified data will be considered finalized in the forthcoming subchapter U rules. This clarification of timeline allows the Coordinating Board flexibility to work with institutions in conducting the standard data collection process, while also setting in place a point at which any remaining errors need to be corrected through the formal data reporting error process outlined in §13.525. Additionally, a new definition is added for public junior colleges to clarify the reference to affected institutions.
Section 13.523, Certification of Compliance, updates the email address where institutions may submit their attestations of certification of compliance and adds compliance monitoring findings under the list of disclosures. Statute grants the Coordinating Board authority to conduct compliance monitoring of institutions, including for accuracy of data reported for formula funding (Texas Education Code, §61.035). Adding a requirement for compliance monitoring findings under this provision ensures the Coordinating Board will have a full picture of potentially relevant findings.
Sections 13.523 and 13.524 are amended to make conforming changes regarding how public junior colleges are referenced.
Section 13.525, Commissioner Review of Required Reporting; Data Reporting Errors, makes two key changes: the rule opens the window to make a data reporting error determination starting from finalization of fundable certified data, which is set at May 1; and the Chief Executive Officer of an institution potentially affected by a data reporting error may initially notify the Commissioner of Higher Education of the data reporting error. The rule thus grants an affected college an avenue to notify the Coordinating Board of any significant discrepancies in data potentially affecting funding, requiring that a single official have responsibility for official data error notifications to ensure clarity of communication.
Section 13.528, Recovery of Overallocated Funds, and 13.529, Payment of Under-allocated Funds, are amended to refer to subchapter U instead of S due to the movement of relevant rules. Section 13.528 is also amended to provide a clarifying statement that recoveries of overallocated funds can be made in relation to the settle up process in addition to the close out process.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendments are adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 130A.005, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules and require reporting to implement the Public Junior College State Finance Program.
The adopted amendments affects Texas Education Code, Section 130A.006.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403402
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 31, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6548
19 TAC §§13.553 - 13.555, 13.559
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments and new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 13, Subchapter S, Community College Finance Program: Base and Performance Tier Methodology, §13.553 - 13.555, with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 31, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3886). The rules will be republished. Section 13.559 is adopted without changes and will not be republished.
The amendments concern the base tier, performance tier, and the rates for the community college finance program. Specifically, this amendment will set the amount of money allocated in a fiscal year for the base tier at 5 percent and for the performance tier at 95 percent. In addition, this amendment adopts monetary rates for each fundable outcome achieved by a community college.
Rules 13.553, Definitions, and §13.554, Base Tier Allotment, contain amendments that would establish a 95 to 5 percent split between total allocations in a fiscal year for performance tier and base tier respectively. The performance tier component of the community college finance system is designed to give community colleges financial incentive for successful completion of certain fundable outcomes, like student transfer, dual credit provision, and attainment of credentials of value. The base tier component of the system provides baseline state support for community colleges depending on ability to raise local funds to support operations. These amendments would carry out legislative intent in implementing the new community college finance program, ensuring that state funding is primarily focused on rewarding outcomes serving state, regional, and workforce needs (Texas Education Code, §130A.001).
Rule 13.555, Performance Tier Funding, sets out the major components of the performance tier: to receive funding, institutions must achieve certain types of fundable outcomes, weighted according to certain characteristics, multiplied by the monetary rate for each fundable outcome set in rule. The proposed amendments clarify that the Coordinating Board will determine institutions' weighted fundable outcome completions based on the better of the average of three fiscal years or the current fiscal year. This feature ensures that community colleges may expect predictability in the expected data projections the Coordinating Board will use to determine funding amounts, while still incentivizing exceptional current performance.
Rule 13.559, Performance Tier: Rates, sets the monetary rates for each type of fundable outcome achieved by an institution. These fundable outcomes include the conferring of fundable credentials (including associate degrees, bachelor's degrees, and many types of workforce credentials), the credential of value premium, student completion of 15 dual credit hours, and successful student transfer to a public four-year institution. Rates are generally maintained for consistency with those set for fiscal year 2024 formula funding, with the exception of dual credit attainment and occupational skills awards (OSAs). The dual credit outcome rate is increased to match the transfer outcome rate to reflect the efficacy of dual credit at preparing high school students to enter postsecondary education and avoid penalizing colleges when dual credit students enroll at other institutions after high school. The OSA rate is increased to match the rate for the institutional credential leading to licensure and certification (ICLC) to equally fund the conferral of these two short-term workforce credential types.
The rate for third-party credentials, a new fundable outcome, is set at the same rate as the other short-term workforce credentials. The rate for the Opportunity High School Diploma, another new fundable outcome, is set to match the transfer fundable outcome rate. Rates for the new credential of value premiums are set at 25 percent of the rate for each credential of value baseline to which they apply to reflect the added expenditures for financial aid and other student support that may be associated with helping students complete credentials more quickly and with lower costs.
A full layout of the weights and rates for the FY 2025 formula funding cycle can be seen in the supporting figure.
The following comments were received regarding the adoption of the new rule.
Comment: Hill College submitted a comment suggesting that the count used for dynamic funding calculations be the better of the projected FY 25 count (as it is currently) or the 3-year average of FY 22, FY 23, and projected FY 24 (instead of FY 23, projected FY 24, and projected FY 25).
Response: The Coordinating Board thanks Hill College for the comment and respectfully disagrees. Given the Coordinating Board's priority of reducing the lag time between outcome occurrences and their reflection in performance funding, the Board has determined to use the projected count for the fiscal year in question consistently as the most recent year both in itself and within the three-year average both initially and in our dynamic payments process to minimize the potential for disruptive funding changes. The Coordinating Board also notes that when fiscal year (FY) 2025 funding becomes a college's operating source, all of its outcomes for FY 2024 will have already occurred, such that its ability to improve its three-year average count with a second year of actual data (the substitute of actual FY 24 for projected FY 24) is not hindered by changes in FY 25 funding. Furthermore, a college that produces higher-than-projected FY 24 outcomes can anticipate additional funding in February of 2025. The Coordinating Board appreciates the concern that projecting further into the future will extend an existing downward trajectory and are taking possible action at this time on a policy to limit by rule the allowable extent of such changes in the forecasting model.
Subsequent to the posting of the rules in the Texas Register, the Coordinating Board has corrected typographical and grammatical errors in §13.554, Base Tier Allotment.
The amendments and new section are adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 130A.005, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules as necessary to implement and administer the community college finance system.
The adopted amendments and new section affect Texas Education Code, Section 130A.101.
§13.553.Definitions.
The following words and terms, when used in this subchapter, shall have the following meanings:
(1) Academically Disadvantaged--A designation that applies to postsecondary students who have not met the college-readiness standard in one or more Texas Success Initiative (TSI) assessments as provided by §4.57 of this title (relating to Texas Success Initiative Assessment College Readiness Standards), and who were not classified as either waived or exempt pursuant to §4.54 of this title (relating to Exemption).
(2) Adult Learner--A student aged 25 or older on September 1 of the fiscal year for which the applicable data are reported, in accordance with Coordinating Board data reporting requirements.
(3) Advanced Technical Certificate (ATC)--A certificate that has a specific associate or baccalaureate degree or junior level standing in a baccalaureate degree program as a prerequisite for admission. An ATC consists of at least 16 semester credit hours (SCH) and no more than 45 SCH and must be focused, clearly related to the prerequisite degree, and justifiable to meet industry or external agency requirements.
(4) Associate Degree--An academic associate degree as defined under Texas Education Code, §61.003(11), or an applied associate degree as defined under Texas Education Code, §61.003(12)(B).
(5) Baccalaureate Degree--A degree program that includes any grouping of subject matter courses consisting of at least 120 SCH which, when satisfactorily completed by a student, will entitle that student to an undergraduate degree from a public junior college.
(6) Base Tier Funding--The amount of state and local funding determined by the Board for each public junior college that ensures the college has access to a defined level of funding for instruction and operations.
(7) Base Year--The time period comprising the year of contact hours used for calculating the contact hour funding to public junior colleges. The Base Year for a funded fiscal year consists of the reported Summer I and II academic term from the fiscal year two years prior to the funded fiscal year; the Fall academic term one fiscal year prior to the funded fiscal year; and the Spring academic term one fiscal year prior to the funded fiscal year.
(8) Basic Allotment--A calculation of the dollar value per Weighted FTSE, based on appropriations made in that biennium's General Appropriations Act pursuant to §13.554(c) of this subchapter (relating to Base Tier Allotment).
(9) Census Date--The date upon which a college may report a student in attendance for the purposes of formula funding, as specified in the Coordinating Board Management (CBM) manual for the year in which the funding is reported.
(10) Continuing Education Certificate--A credential awarded for completion of a program of instruction that meets or exceeds 360 contact hours and earns continuing education units. The certificate program is intended to prepare the student to qualify for employment; to qualify for employment advancement; or to bring the student's knowledge or skills up to date in a particular field or profession; and is listed in an institution's approved program inventory.
(11) Credential of Value Baseline--A credential earned by a student that would be expected to provide a positive return on investment. Credential of Value Baseline methodology is described in §13.556 of this subchapter (relating to Performance Tier: Fundable Outcomes).
(12) Credential of Value Premium Fundable Outcome--A fundable outcome earned by an institution for a credential earned by a student that would be expected to provide a wage premium. Credential of Value Premium methodology is described in §13.556 of this subchapter.
(13) Credentialing Examination--A licensure or registration exam required by a state or national regulatory entity or a certification exam required by an authorized professional organization. An authorized professional organization is a national, industry-recognized organization that sets occupational proficiency standards, conducts examinations to determine candidate proficiency, and confers an industry-based certification.
(14) Dual Credit or Dual Enrollment Fundable Outcome--An outcome achieved when a student earns at least 15 SCH or the equivalent of fundable dual credit or dual enrollment courses, defined as follows:
(A) Courses that qualify as dual credit courses as defined in §4.83(10) of this title (relating to Definitions); and:
(i) In fiscal year 2025 or later, apply toward an academic or career and technical education program requirement at the postsecondary level; or
(ii) In fiscal Year 2025 or later are completed by a student who graduates with a Texas First Diploma, as codified in chapter 21, subchapter D of this title (relating to Texas First Early High School Completion Program).
(B) All dual credit courses taken by a student enrolled in an approved Early College High School program, as provided by Texas Education Code, §28.009, except a physical education course taken by a high school student for high school physical education credit.
(15) Economically Disadvantaged--A designation that applies to postsecondary students who received the federal Pell Grant under 20 U.S.C. §1070a.
(16) Equivalent of a Semester Credit Hour--A unit of measurement for a continuing education course, determined as a ratio of one continuing education unit to 10 contact hours of instruction, which may be expressed as a decimal. One semester credit hour of instruction equals 1.6 continuing education units of instruction. In a continuing education course, not fewer than 16 contact hours are equivalent to one semester credit hour.
(17) Formula Funding--The funding allocated by the Coordinating Board among all public junior colleges by applying provisions of the Texas Education Code, agency rule, and the General Appropriations Act to a sector-wide appropriation from the General Appropriations Act.
(18) Full-Time Student Equivalent (FTSE)--A synthetic measure of enrollment based on the number of instructional hours delivered by an institution of higher education divided by the number of hours associated with full-time enrollment for the time period in question.
(19) Fundable Credential--As defined in §13.556(b) of this subchapter.
(20) Fundable Outcome Weights--A multiplier applied to eligible fundable outcomes to generate a Weighted Outcome Completion for use in determining the Performance Tier allocation. The methodology for each Fundable Outcome Weight is defined in §13.557 of this subchapter (relating to Performance Tier: Fundable Outcome Weights).
(21) High-Demand Fields--A field in which an institution awards a credential that provides a graduate with specific skills and knowledge required for the graduate to be successful in a high-demand occupation, based on the list of high-demand fields as defined in subchapter T of this chapter (relating to Community College Finance Program: High-Demand Fields).
(22) Institutional Credentials Leading to Licensure or Certification (ICLC)--A credential awarded by an institution upon a student's completion of a course or series of courses that represent the achievement of identifiable skill proficiency and leading to licensure or certification. This definition includes a credential that meets the definition of an Occupational Skills Award in all respects except that the program may provide training for an occupation that is not included in the Local Workforce Development Board's Target Occupations list.
(23) Level 1 Certificate--A certificate designed to provide the necessary academic skills and the workforce skills, knowledge, and abilities necessary to attain entry-level employment or progression toward a Level 2 Certificate or an Applied Associate Degree, with at least 50% of course credits drawn from a single technical specialty. A Level 1 Certificate must be designed for a student to complete in one calendar year or less time and consists of at least 15 semester credit hours and no more than 42 semester credit hours.
(24) Level 2 Certificate--A certificate consisting of at least 30 semester credit hours and no more than 51 semester credit hours. Students enrolled in Level 2 Certificates must demonstrate meeting college readiness standards set forth in §4.57 of this title and other eligibility requirements determined by the institution.
(25) Local Share--The amount determined to be the institution's contribution of local funds to the Instruction and Operations (I&O) amount for each public junior college. The amount consists of estimated ad valorem maintenance and operations tax revenue and tuition and fees revenue, as determined by the Board.
(26) Non-Formula Support Item--An amount appropriated by line item in the General Appropriations Act to a single public junior college or limited group of colleges for a specific, named purpose.
(27) Occupational Skills Award (OSA)--A sequence of courses that meet the minimum standard for program length specified by the Texas Workforce Commission for the federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) program (9-14 SCH for credit courses or 144-359 contact hours for workforce continuing education courses). An OSA must possess the following characteristics:
(A) The content of the credential must be recommended by an external workforce advisory committee, or the program must provide training for an occupation that is included on the Local Workforce Development Board's Target Occupations list;
(B) In most cases, the credential should be composed of Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM) courses only. However, non-stratified academic courses may be used if recommended by the external committee and if appropriate for the content of the credential;
(C) The credential complies with the Single Course Delivery guidelines for WECM courses; and
(D) The credential prepares students for employment in accordance with guidelines established for the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.
(28) Opportunity High School Diploma Fundable Outcome--An alternative means by which adult students enrolled in a workforce program at a public junior college may earn a high school diploma at a college through concurrent enrollment in a competency-based program, as codified in Texas Education Code, chapter 130, subchapter O, and Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 12.
(29) Semester Credit Hour (SCH)--A unit of measure of instruction, represented in intended learning outcomes and verified by evidence of student achievement, that reasonably approximates one hour of classroom instruction or direct faculty instruction and a minimum of two hours out of class student work for each week over a 15-week period in a semester system or the equivalent amount of work over a different amount of time. An institution is responsible for determining the appropriate number of semester credit hours awarded for its programs in accordance with Federal definitions, requirements of the institution's accreditor, and commonly accepted practices in higher education.
(30) Structured Co-Enrollment Fundable Outcome--A student who earns at least 15 semester credit hours at the junior college district in a program structured through a binding written agreement between a general academic teaching institution and a community college. Under such a program, students will be admitted to both institutions and recognized as having matriculated to both institutions concurrently. The Structured Co-enrollment Fundable Outcome does not include courses fundable under the Dual Credit or Dual Enrollment Fundable Outcome.
(31) Third-Party Credential--A certificate as defined in Texas Education Code, §61.003(12)(C), that is conferred by a third-party provider. The third-party provider of the certificate develops the instructional program content, develops assessments to evaluate student mastery of the instructional content, and confers the third-party credential. A third-party credential that meets the requirements of §13.556 of this subchapter is fundable in accordance with that section.
(32) Transfer Fundable Outcome--An institution earns a fundable outcome in the Performance Tier under §13.555 of this subchapter (relating to Performance Tier Funding) when a student enrolls in a general academic teaching institution, as defined in Texas Education Code, §61.003, after earning at least 15 semester credit hours from a single public junior college district as established under §13.556(e) of this subchapter. For the purpose of this definition, semester credit hours (SCH) shall refer to semester credit hours or the equivalent of semester credit hours.
(33) Weighted Full-Time Student Equivalent (Weighted FTSE or WFTSE)--A synthetic measure of enrollment equal to the number of instructional hours delivered by an institution of higher education divided by the number of hours associated with full-time enrollment for the fiscal year two years prior to the one for which formula funding is being calculated, where the hours delivered to students with certain characteristics carry a value other than one.
(34) Weighted Outcomes Completion--A synthetic count of completions of designated student success outcomes where outcomes achieved by students with certain characteristics carry a value other than one. The synthetic count may also represent a calculation, such as an average or maximizing function, other than a simple sum.
§13.554.Base Tier Allotment.
(a) Coordinating Board staff will calculate Base Tier funding for each public junior college district (district) as the greater of the Instruction and Operations (I&O) amount minus Local Share and zero.
(b) A district's I&O amount is the sum of the number of Weighted Full-Time Student Equivalents (Weighted FTSE) enrolled at the district multiplied by the Basic Allotment amount calculated by the Commissioner of Higher Education as provided in subsection (c) of this section and the district's total Contact Hour Funding as determined by the Coordinating Board.
(1) Weighted FTSE for each district is the sum of the district's full-time student equivalents weighted for the student characteristics under subparagraph (B) of this paragraph and the scale adjustment as provided in Texas Education Code, §130A.054.
(A) For purposes of determining annual Weighted FTSE as a component of formula funding for the fiscal year under this section, a district's full-time student equivalents (FTSE) is equal to the sum of:
(i) the total semester credit hours in which for-credit students were enrolled at the district as of the census dates of all academic semesters or other academic terms that were reported for the fiscal year two years prior, divided by 30; and
(ii) the total contact hours in which continuing education students were enrolled at the district as of the census dates of all academic semesters or other academic terms that were reported for the fiscal year two years prior, divided by 900.
(B) The Coordinating Board shall apply a weight to the calculation of Weighted FTSE as follows:
(i) if a student is classified as economically disadvantaged during the fiscal year two years prior, FTSE generated by that student shall have an additional value of 25%;
(ii) if a student is classified as academically disadvantaged during the fiscal year two years prior, FTSE generated by that student shall have an additional value of 25%; and
(iii) if a student is classified as an adult learner on September 1 of the fiscal year two years prior, FTSE generated by that student shall have an additional value of 50%.
(C) The Coordinating Board calculates a district's scale adjustment weight as the greater of the difference between 5,000 and the number of FTSE as defined in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph multiplied by .40, and zero.
(2) For the purpose of calculating formula funding amounts for the fiscal year, Coordinating Board staff will calculate Contact Hour Funding for a public junior college district by first multiplying the number of reported certified fundable contact hours generated by the district in each discipline during the Base Year of the fiscal year by the average cost of delivery per contact hour for each discipline respectively as described in the Report of Fundable Operating Expenses in accordance with §13.524(c) of this chapter (relating to Required Reporting) and summing across all disciplines. Contact hours attributable to students enrolled in a junior-level or senior-level course are weighed in the same manner as a lower division course in a corresponding field. That sum will then be multiplied by a rate calculated by the Commissioner of Higher Education as provided in subsection (c) of this section in accordance with the General Appropriations Act to calculate the district's Contact Hour Funding.
(c) The Commissioner shall calculate the Basic Allotment and the rate to be used for calculating districts' Contact Hour Funding such that:
(1) Contact Hour Funding is equivalent to Basic Allotment Funding for the fiscal year; and
(2) The sum of base tier funding to all districts for the fiscal year equals one-nineteenth of the sum of performance tier foundation payments calculated using funding certified data as described in subchapter U of this chapter (relating to Community College Finance Program: Forecasting Methodology and Finance Policy) by June 1 prior to the fiscal year.
(3) The Commissioner may modify the base tier funding on a pro rata basis in accordance with this subsection to account for any changes to performance tier totals arising from any amendments to rule adopted by the Board between June 1 and the beginning of the fiscal year.
(d) For the purpose of calculating formula funding amounts for the fiscal year, the Local Share for each public junior college district equals the sum of:
(1) the estimated amount of revenue that would have been generated by the district if it had assessed a $0.05 maintenance and operations ad valorem tax on each $100 of taxable property value in its taxing district, as reported under §13.524 of this chapter, which the Coordinating Board will calculate as the district's current tax collection for fiscal year two years prior multiplied by the ratio of the maintenance and operations tax rate to the total tax rate, divided by the product of the maintenance and operations tax rate and 100 and multiplied by five; and
(2) the amount of tuition and fee revenue calculated as the sum of:
(A) the district's FTSE two fiscal years prior as defined in subsection (b)(1)(A) of this section, except for semester credit hours derived from students enrolled in dual credit or dual enrollment courses, multiplied by a rate calculated by the Commissioner of Higher Education, which is the enrollment-weighted statewide average of tuition and fees charges to full-time equivalent students residing within the district of the public junior college they attend, as reported by the public junior colleges in the Integrated Fiscal Reporting System for the fiscal year two fiscal years prior; and
(B) the total semester credit hours of dual credit courses in which students were enrolled as of the census dates of all academic semesters or other academic terms that were reported in the fiscal year two years prior, multiplied by the Financial Aid for Swift Transfer (FAST) tuition rate as codified in §13.504 of this chapter (relating to Financial Aid for Swift Transfer (FAST) Tuition Rate) in the fiscal year two years prior. For fiscal year 2023, the FAST tuition rate is equal to the rate for fiscal year 2024.
§13.555.Performance Tier Funding.
(a) Each public junior college district shall receive Performance Tier funding under Texas Education Code, chapter 130A, subchapter C. A district increases its Performance Tier funding amount by producing Fundable Outcomes, with Fundable Outcomes achieved in certain categories eligible for an additional multiplier (Fundable Outcome Weights), as calculated by the Coordinating Board. A Fundable Outcome multiplied by the Fundable Outcome Weight constitutes a Weighted Outcome Completion. A district's Performance Tier funding amount equals the total of each Weighted Outcome Completion multiplied by the funding rates for that completion, as identified in §13.559 of this subchapter (relating to Performance Tier: Rates). Funding rates include an additional weight for fundable credentials delivered in a high-demand field.
(b) Fundable Outcomes. Section 13.556 of this subchapter (relating to Performance Tier: Fundable Outcomes) defines each Fundable Outcome type, including the methodology used to calculate each outcome.
(c) Fundable Outcome Weight. Section 13.557 of this subchapter (relating to Performance Tier: Fundable Outcome Weights) and subchapter T of this chapter (relating to Community College
Finance Program: High-Demand Fields) define each Fundable Outcome Weight type, including the methodology used to calculate each outcome. Fundable Outcome Weights consist of the following categories:
(1) Fundable Outcomes achieved by economically disadvantaged students;
(2) Fundable Outcomes achieved by academically disadvantaged students; and
(3) Fundable Outcomes achieved by adult learners.
(d) For the purposes of calculating Weighted Outcome Completions for formula funding amounts for a fiscal year, the Coordinating Board shall calculate the funded number of Weighted Outcome Completions as the greater of the average of the district's Weighted Outcome Completion counts for the fiscal year being funded and two fiscal years prior, as calculated by subchapter U of this chapter (relating to Community College Finance Program: Forecasting Methodology and Finance Policy), and the count for the fiscal year being funded, as calculated according to subchapter U.
(e) Fundable Outcome Rates. Section 13.558 of this subchapter (relating to Performance Tier: High-Demand Fields) and §13.559 of this subchapter defines fundable outcomes awarded in a high-demand field and the rates for each fundable outcome, including the higher rate for fundable credentials awarded in a high demand field.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403403
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 31, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6548
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts the repeal of Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 13, Subchapter S, §§13.560 - 13.562, Community College Finance Program, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 31, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3890). The rules will not be republished.
The adopted repeal reorganizes rules relating to public junior college finance in order to group rules by thematic content. The Coordinating Board intends to adopt a separate forthcoming subchapter relating to financial allocations for public junior colleges; this forthcoming chapter will contain the content of the rules proposed for repeal instead.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the repeal.
The repeal is adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 130A.005, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules and take other actions consistent with Texas Education Code, Chapter 61, Chapter 130, and Chapter 130A to implement Tex. H.B. 8, 88th Leg., R.S. (2023).
The adopted repeal affects Texas Education Code, Sections 130.0031 and 130A.007.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403404
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 31, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6548
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 13, Subchapter U, Community College Finance Program: Forecasting Methodology and Finance Policy, §13.624, with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 31, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3891). The rule will be republished. Sections 13.620 - 13.623 and 13.625 - 13.630 are adopted without changes and will not be republished.
Specifically, these new sections establish the structure necessary for a dynamic payment system, including parameters for forecasting and payment schedules for the coming fiscal years. The new dynamic payment system will minimize both the lag time between when colleges achieve fundable outcomes and when they receive performance funding and the impact from the changes to state funding that may result.
Rule 13.620, Purpose, states the purpose of the subchapter, which is to establish definitions, timeline of payments, methodologies, and other processes necessary to calculate and distribute formula funding to community colleges.
Rule 13.621, Authority, states the authority for the subchapter, contained in Texas Education Code, §130A.005. This provision allows the Coordinating Board to adopt rules to implement the State Public Junior College Finance Program, with relevant provisions in Texas Education Code, Chapters 61, 130, and 130A.
Rule 13.622, Applicability, establishes that, unless otherwise provided, the version of Subchapter U that was applicable to a fiscal year's formula funding is applicable to any adjustments to that funding that may be made during the subsequent fiscal year. This provides a reliable basis for colleges to estimate the future funding implications of strategic investments and programming decisions.
Rule 13.623, Definitions, lists the definitions pertinent to the timeline of payments, forecasting outcomes, and the calculation of payments. The definitions include:
Certified Outcomes are the number of times a fundable outcome, as defined by Subchapter S, has occurred for a given year according to certified data.
Close-Out Adjustment is defined as the amount of change between forecasting-based formula funding, inclusive of adjustments, and formula funding recalculated using entirely actual outcomes data instead of forecasted outcomes. This adjustment is applied to the first formula payment of the subsequent fiscal year.
Dynamic Adjustment is the update to the forecast-based formula funding for the current fiscal year that, if positive, is applied to the second of three payments in a fiscal year using more recent actual outcomes data to replace some forecasted outcomes and reforecast others.
Fundable Certified Data is data after May 1 of a fiscal year used to calculate formula funding for the next fiscal year. This is distinct from Certified Outcomes because institutions may correct their certified data after they submit it to the Coordinating Board. May 1 is a reasonable, operationally necessary deadline for these corrections to end, enabling official formula funding calculations to begin.
Foundation Payment is the term used to describe the sum of Base Tier and Performance Tier funding for a community college district in a fiscal year.
Error Adjustment is a correction to formula funding that takes place after the Close Out Adjustment.
Institution and Public Junior College are terms used to refer to the public community colleges.
Preliminary Outcomes are those outcomes used to calculate the dynamic adjustment, which is a mid-year correction to formula funding using less forecasted data and more actual data.
Settle Up Adjustment is the update to forecasting-based formula funding for the prior fiscal year that, if positive, is applied to the second of three payments in a fiscal year using more recent actual outcomes data to replace some forecasted outcomes and reforecast others.
Rule 13.624, Forecasting Fundable Outcomes, establishes the methodology by which fundable outcomes are forecasted. The methodology is time series projection with additive exponential triple smoothing towards the regression line where the independent variable is the year and the dependent variable is the performance for a given outcome. This method puts additional weight on more recent outcomes and accounts for seasonal patterns. The forecasted outcomes are bounded such that they cannot increase by more than 10 percent or decrease by 5 percent relative to the previous year, with an exception to provide an estimate when the value for the previous year is zero. Forecasts for the outcomes subtypes Academic Disadvantage, Economic Disadvantage, Adult Learner, and High-Demand Field assume that the ratio of total outcomes to each subtype outcome in the historical data is the same for the forecasted years.
Rule 13.625, Schedule and Composition of Payments for Fiscal Year 2025, establishes the specific structure of payments for FY 2025. For FY 2025 all non-formula funding would be distributed by September 25. Formula funding would be distributed in three payments: 50 percent of total formula funding in October (inclusive of any FY 2024 Close Out Adjustment amounts), 25 percent in February (inclusive of the FY 2025 Dynamic Adjustment), and 25 percent in June. The June payment may be prorated to bring total formula funding within legislative appropriation for community college formula funding. The addition of the Dynamic Adjustment in the spring payment creates a financial feedback mechanism at the earliest opportunity under the data collection timeline while avoiding undue disruption to college operations.
Rule 13.626, Schedule and Composition of Payments for Fiscal Year 2026, establishes the specific structure of payments for the indicated fiscal years. For FY 2026 all non-formula funding would be distributed by September 25. Formula funding would be distributed in three payments; 50 percent of total formula funding in October (inclusive of any FY 2025 Projected Settle Up Adjustment amounts), 25 percent in February (inclusive of the Dynamic Adjustment and FY 2025 Settle Up Adjustment amounts), and 25 percent in June. The rule establishes that the Commissioner of Higher Education may adjust any payment under this schedule to ensure that a college receives the amount it is entitled to. The addition of the Projected Settle Up Adjustment in the fall payment creates the first instance when formula funding can be reduced in response to performance that fails to meet projections. It includes two key safeguard features: it uses only fundable certified outcomes, whereas mid-year, positive-only adjustments can be made with preliminary outcomes; and it is applied to the first payment of a fiscal year, providing colleges with adequate notice of their upcoming funding for budget and planning purposes.
Rule 13.627, Schedule and Composition of Payments Beginning Fiscal Year 2027, establishes the specific structure of payments for all fiscal years beginning in FY 2027. All non-formula funding would be distributed by September 25. Formula funding would be distributed in three payments; 50 percent of total formula funding in October (inclusive of any prior-year Projected Settle Up Adjustment amounts and Close Out Adjustments from two years prior), 25 percent in February (inclusive of the Dynamic Adjustment and prior-year Settle Up Adjustment amounts), and 25 percent in June. The June payment may be prorated to bring total formula funding within the amount appropriated by the legislature for community college formula funding. The Close Out Adjustment in the first payment provides the final alignment between the sum of performance payments and adjustments for the fiscal year two years prior and performance funding based entirely on fundable certified outcomes data from that year.
Rule 13.628, Substantial Negative Impacts, establishes that the Commissioner of Higher Education may apply required reductions in performance funding over a longer period of time as governed by the data error policy should the Commissioner of Higher Education determine that the standard settle-up or close-out process would have a substantial negative impact on an institution's operations or students.
Rule 13.629, Formula Transition Funding, establishes that after calculating the base tier and performance tier funding for each community college, the Coordinating Board shall ensure that a community college district does not receive less in formula funding in FY 2025 than it received in FY 2023 appropriations for formula funding (contact hours, success points, core operations, and bachelor's of applied technology funding) and need-based supplements. The new rule moves an existing formula transition funding provision from Subchapter S to Subchapter U, as the subject matter more closely pertains to payment provisions. This provision smooths the transition from the prior system of formula funding predominantly based on contact hour generation to the new system of performance-based funding. It ensures that no institution will experience a significant detrimental impact on its operations as the new system adjusts funding and moves to outcome-driven performance.
Rule 13.630, Limitations on Spending, describes the restrictions on how community college districts may expend state-appropriated funds, in alignment with state statute (Texas Education Code, §130.003(c); General Appropriations Act, 88th Leg. R.S., H.B. 1, art. III-231, ch. 1170, Rider 14). The Coordinating Board adopts this provision in response to requests from stakeholders for greater clarification of permissible expenditures. The new rule moves existing limitations on spending provision from Subchapter S to Subchapter U, as the subject matter more closely pertains to payment-related provisions.
Subsequent to the posting of the rules in the Texas Register, Coordinating Board staff recommend the following amendments:
Rule 13.624(c) amends the forecasting methodology for Institutional Credentials Leading to Licensure or Certification to be in line with the definition. The historical years for the FY 2025 ICLC calculation includes the former FY 2024 licensure/certification no credential outcome data to be used for forecasting purposes.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the new rule.
The new sections are adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 130A.005, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules to carry out the Public Junior College State Finance Program.
The adopted new sections affect Texas Education Code, Chapter 130A, and Sections 61.059 and 130.0031.
§13.624.Forecasting Fundable Outcomes.
(a) Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish the methodology for forecasting fundable performance outcomes to calculate performance tier funding amounts covering a time period for which performance data are not yet available. The Coordinating Board shall forecast each fundable performance outcome as defined under §13.556 of this chapter (relating to Performance Tier: Fundable Outcomes), except those set out under §13.553(28) and (31) of this chapter (relating to Definitions) for each public junior college using historical performance data. The Coordinating Board shall use these figures to calculate each performance tier payment for the funded fiscal year as established under §13.555 of this chapter (relating to Performance Tier Funding).
(b) Methodology. The Coordinating Board shall forecast the total annual count of a fundable performance outcome for a public junior college using the exponential triple smoothing method of trend analysis with additive error, trend, and seasonality parameters applied to time series data. This time series data shall use fundable certified data with the counts of fundable outcomes achieved annually by the public junior college during no fewer than the six most recent years for which data are available except as otherwise provided by subsection (c) of this section.
(c) Other time series data. The time series data for forecasting Occupational Skills Awards and Institutional Credentials Leading to Licensure or Certification shall use fundable certified data with the counts of each fundable outcome achieved annually by a public junior college during no fewer than the four most recent fiscal years for which data are available. For Institutional Credentials Leading to Licensure or Certification, the Coordinating Board shall use the definition for the credential in effect during the fiscal year for which the credential was counted.
(d) Bounded projections. The forecasted total annual count of a fundable performance outcome for a fiscal year shall not exceed 110 percent nor be less than 95 percent of the count for the prior year. If the count for the prior year is also a forecasted value, then the maximum allowable change for the current year shall be calculated against the prior year's forecasted value as adjusted pursuant to this rule. If the value for a fundable performance outcome for the most recent actual, not forecasted data is zero, the forecast shall not be bounded in the next fiscal year. In no circumstances may an estimated fundable performance outcome be negative.
(e) As provided by §13.556 of this chapter, the Coordinating Board shall forecast the number of each fundable credential in a high-demand field, as defined under subchapter T of this chapter (relating to Community College Finance Program: High-Demand Fields), for a fiscal year by multiplying the average annual percentage of the credential conferred in a high-demand field in the credential's time series data by the total count of the credential forecast to be conferred in that year.
(f) As provided by §13.556 of this chapter, the Coordinating Board shall forecast the number of each fundable credential conferred to students who are academically disadvantaged, economically disadvantaged, and adult learners, as provided by §13.557 of this chapter (relating to Performance Tier: Fundable Outcome Weights), for a fiscal year by multiplying the average percentage of the credential conferred by the institution to students in each respective subgroup in the credential's time series data by the total count of the credential forecast to be conferred by the institution in that year.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403409
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 31, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6548
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 15, Subchapter A, §15.10, Texas Research Incentive Program, with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3091). The rules will be republished.
Amendments clarify the program administration and newly establish the processes for application review in administrative law. The Coordinating Board used negotiated rulemaking to develop these rules. The Coordinating Board will make reports of negotiated rulemaking committees available upon request. The Coordinating Board revised the amendment after publication in the Texas Register to clarify that the Coordinating Board staff may seek administrative corrections during the review of applications.
There are no amendments to §15.10(a) and (b).
Amendments to §15.10(c) revise definitions to improve the clarity of program administration. The new definitions added are: Administrative Correction, Board, Certification, Coordinating Board, Coordinating Board Staff or Board Staff, Date of Deposit, Date of Receipt, Donor Agreement Form, Internal Review Committee, Matching Grant, and Peer Review. The definitions that are amended are Bundled Gifts, Date of Certification, Eligible Gifts, and Ineligible Gifts. The definition of Gift is deleted.
Paragraph (1) defines administrative correction as the act of submitting additional supporting documentation to verify that a gift is an eligible gift. This provision allows an institution to addressing question from the internal review committee.
Paragraphs (2), (5) and (6) specify three distinct entities: "Board," meaning the nine-member appointed governing body of the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board; "Coordinating Board," meaning the state agency as a whole; and "Coordinating Board Staff or Board Staff," meaning the staff of the agency. Separating these terms allows the Coordinating Board to make a distinction between actions taken by the governing body, agency staff, and the agency as a whole.
Paragraph (3) clarifies that bundled gifts are combined from the same private source to determine eligibility for matching grants. An institution must deposit a component gift within ten (10) calendar days of the first deposit.
Paragraphs (4) and (7) - (9) amend definitions of the specific dates on which actions occur in the TRIP to ensure specificity within the rule.
Paragraph (4) defines certification as the Board approval of the date of deposit of a gift and its qualification as an eligible gift for matching grants.
Paragraph (7) is an amended definition for date of certification. The previous definition was similar to the new definition for date of deposit.
Paragraphs (8) and (9) are new definitions for date of deposit and date of receipt. These are the date the institution receives cash from a gift and the date the Coordinating Board receives the TRIP application, respectively.
Paragraph (10) defines the donor agreement form, a form currently required as part of a TRIP application.
Paragraph (11) amends the term eligible funds as eligible gifts. The word gift is used consistently throughout the rule. The amendment specifies that non-cash gifts must be converted to cash to be an eligible gift.
Paragraph (13) amends the term ineligible funds to ineligible gifts and corrects the inclusion of bundled gifts to specify bundled gifts less than $100,000 (A). It adds a gift that has been pledged but not received (B), in-kind gifts or discounts (F), and a gift not originally donated for research purposes (H). The definition includes a gift for which an institution has made a commitment to the donor other than use of the gift in the manner the donor specifies (G).
Paragraph (14) defines internal review committee to provide clarity on the role of staff in application review.
Paragraph (15) defines matching grant as the state appropriations used to match eligible gifts in the TRIP program.
Paragraph (16) defines peer review as the review by eligible public institutions of all applications and the submission of challenges to eligibility for matching grants.
Amendments to §15.10(e) clarifies the order by which eligible gifts receive state matching grants when the legislature appropriates less than would be required to fully fund all applications that have been certified to receive state matching grants.
Amendments to §15.10(f) replace the rules for certification of a gift to receive state matching grants. The revised section provides clear and specific requirements on what an eligible application contains and how one must be delivered to the Coordinating Board. The amendment to the rule increases the length of time for institutions to submit an application from thirty (30) days to sixty (60) days to allow more time for institutions to get the required documentation and signatures. Additionally, the rule clarifies that administrative corrections could be requested by review staff during the review of applications. In line with current procedures, the amendments also require the submission of two applications - one without redactions and one with redactions to facilitate the peer review process.
Amendments to §15.10(g) delete a requirement to provide a list of university-affiliated entities to the Coordinating Board. New subsection (g) related to returned gifts (previously subsection (h)) improve the clarity of what institutions are expected to do when the eligibility of an application changes after it has received matching funds or after it has been submitted, but not yet received matching funds.
New §15.10(h) establishes how the Coordinating Board reviews applications for eligibility, when institutions engage in peer review of applications, when appeals may be submitted, and when the Commissioner shall make recommendations on appeals. The new subsection provides for the Coordinating Board to facilitate the peer review process no less than twice in a fiscal year, anticipated to occur in the first and third quarter of a fiscal year. The rule provides discretion for the Commissioner to delay a peer review if necessary for business needs, provides clarity that the internal review committee may recommend that only a portion of a gift be found as an eligible gift for matching grants, and provides for the institution to submit administrative corrections in their appeal. This subsection codifies current procedures related to the TRIP.
New §5.10(i) details how certification occurs and specifically how applications recommended for state matching funds by the internal review committee and the Commissioner's decisions on appealed applications are approved at quarterly meetings of the Board.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 62.122, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules pertaining to the Texas Research Incentive Program.
The adopted amendment affects Texas Education Code Sections 62.121, 62.122, and 62.123.
§15.10.Texas Research Incentive Program (TRIP).
(a) Purpose. The purpose of this program is to provide matching funds to assist eligible public institutions in leveraging private gifts for the enhancement of research productivity and faculty recruitment.
(b) Authority.
(1) Texas Education Code, §62.122, establishes the Texas Research Incentive Program to provide matching funds to assist eligible public institutions in leveraging private gifts for the enhancement of research productivity and faculty recruitment.
(2) Texas Education Code, §62.123, establishes the rate of matching and authorizes the Board, to establish procedures for the certification of gifts.
(3) Texas Education Code, §62.124, authorizes the Board, to adopt rules for the administration of the program.
(c) Definitions.
(1) Administrative Correction--The submission of supplemental information or supporting financial documentation to verify that the gift as submitted is restricted to research purposes that meet the requirements of an eligible gift.
(2) Board--The governing body of the agency known as the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board.
(3) Bundled Gifts--Gifts from the same private source that are combined to determine eligibility for matching grants. All component gifts of a bundled gift must have deposit dates within ten (10) calendar days of the first deposit.
(4) Certification--Board approval of the date of deposit of a gift and its qualification as an eligible gift for purposes of matching grants.
(5) Coordinating Board--The agency known as the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, including agency staff.
(6) Coordinating Board Staff or Board Staff--Agency staff acting under the direction of the Board and the Commissioner.
(7) Date of Certification--The date of the Board meeting upon which certification occurs.
(8) Date of Deposit--The date the institution receives cash or receives all proceeds of converting a non-cash gift to cash. For gifts that are converted to cash over multiple days, the date of deposit is when the entire gift has been converted to cash and received by the institution. A single gift of stocks or bonds that cannot be sold on a single day may be eligible if the sales are concluded and the proceeds are deposited in the institution's account within ten (10) calendar days from the start of sales.
(9) Date of Receipt--The date the Coordinating Board receives the TRIP application for matching grants.
(10) Donor Agreement Form--A form approved by the Commissioner that is required as part of the application for TRIP matching grants.
(11) Eligible Gifts --Cash or an endowment to an eligible public institution from private sources in a state fiscal year for the purpose of enhancing research activities at the institution, including for endowed chairs, professorships, research facilities, research equipment, program costs, graduate research stipends or fellowships, or undergraduate research. Gifts or endowments that are not cash, including those listed in Texas Education Code, §62.121(2), must be converted to cash before they can be submitted as an eligible gift. These include gifts that are bundled from a private source.
(12) Eligible Public Institution--An institution of higher education designated as an emerging research university under the Coordinating Board's Accountability System or a university affiliated entity of an emerging research university.
(13) Ineligible Gifts--A gift that is not an eligible gift under paragraph (11) of this subsection, which may include the following:
(A) A gift or a bundled gift that is less than $100,000;
(B) A gift that has been pledged but has not been received by the institution;
(C) A gift for undergraduate scholarships or undergraduate financial aid grants;
(D) Any portion in excess of $10 million of gifts or endowments received from a single source in a state fiscal year;
(E) A gift that is bundled by a university-affiliated entity;
(F) In-kind gifts or discounts;
(G) A gift for which an institution has made a commitment of resources or services to the benefit of the donor other than the use of the gift in the manner the donor specifies; or
(H) A gift not originally donated for research purposes.
(14) Internal Review Committee--Coordinating Board staff authorized by the Commissioner to review TRIP applications and provide a recommendation on the eligibility of TRIP applications to the Board.
(15) Matching Grant--State appropriations used to match eligible gifts in the program and administered by the Coordinating Board.
(16) Peer Review--The review of all institutional applications by representatives from each eligible public institution for eligibility criteria, including date of deposit and research enhancing activities. Institutions report any challenges of eligibility to the Internal Review Committee.
(17) Private Sources--Any individual or entity that cannot levy taxes and is not directly supported by tax funds.
(18) Program--The Texas Research Incentive Program (TRIP) established under Texas Education Code, Chapter 62, Subchapter F.
(19) University-Affiliated Entity--An entity whose sole purpose is to support the mission or programs of the university.
(d) Matching Grants. Eligible gifts will be matched at the following rates:
(1) 50 percent of the amount if the amount of a gift or endowment made by a donor on a certain date is at least $100,000, but not more than $999,999;
(2) 75 percent of the amount if the amount of a gift or endowment made by a donor on a certain date is at least $1 million but not more than $1,999,999; or
(3) 100 percent of the amount if the amount of a gift or endowment made by a donor on a certain date is $2 million but not more than $10 million.
(e) Distribution of Matching Grants.
(1) The Coordinating Board will distribute matching grants in order of the date of certification.
(2) If there are insufficient appropriations to provide matching grants for eligible gifts with the same date of certification, the Coordinating Board shall fund those eligible gifts in chronological order of their date of receipt, and any remaining unmatched eligible gifts shall be eligible for matching grants in the following fiscal years using funds appropriated to the program, to the extent funds are available.
(f) Application Requirements. An institution may only submit an eligible gift via application to the Coordinating Board to be certified by the Board as eligible for state matching funds.
(1) The application must contain the following information:
(A) Written documentation from the institution verifying the amount, date of deposit, and source of the gift. Acceptable documentation includes transaction receipts and statements from the institution's bank that identify the donor, recipient institution, amount of the transaction, and date of the transaction.
(B) A copy of the fully executed donor agreement form provided by the Coordinating Board describing the purpose and the restrictions of the gift meeting the definition of eligible gifts, including the following information:
(i) The description of the purpose shall describe how the gift would be used.
(ii) Gifts that are made as part of a pledge series may use the first signed donor agreement for subsequent gifts in that pledge series provided that the purpose is the same and a schedule of pledged gifts is provided using the pledge schedule template provided by the Coordinating Board.
(2) Applications shall exclude portions of a gift that do not meet the requirements of an eligible gift.
(3) An institution shall submit the applications electronically and shall include two versions of the application, one with and one without redactions of personally identifiable information or other information that is confidential by law. The redacted copy will be made available to all eligible public institutions for the purpose of eligibility peer review.
(4) The Coordinating Board may request administrative corrections to facilitate review of applications.
(5) Each institution shall provide all information to the Coordinating Board within sixty (60) days of the date of deposit.
(g) Returned Gifts. If an eligible institution returns any portion of an eligible gift to the donor or the gift is no longer eligible for matching grants, the institution shall take the following actions within thirty (30) days of the change:
(1) If the institution has not yet received a matching grant for the eligible gift, the institution shall notify the Coordinating Board as to the amount and date of the change to withdraw the gift or portion of the gift; and
(2) If the institution has received a matching grant for the eligible gift, the institution shall notify the Coordinating Board as to the amount and date of the change and repay the matching grant to the Coordinating Board. If only a portion of the gift is no longer eligible for matching, the institution may only retain the portion of the match that corresponds to the portion of the gift that remains eligible for matching.
(h) Application Review. Periodically, but at a minimum twice in a fiscal year, the Coordinating Board shall facilitate the review of submitted applications for TRIP matching grants. Coordinating Board staff shall anticipate beginning the review in the first and third quarter of a fiscal year; however, the Commissioner may delay a cycle if warranted, The Internal Review Committee shall facilitate the following:
(1) The Internal Review Committee shall make applications that have not yet been reviewed available to all eligible institutions so that they may submit peer review of a gift's eligibility. The Internal Review Committee shall provide no less than thirty (30) calendar days for the peer review.
(2) The Internal Review Committee shall, after receiving the peer review recommendations, recommend a preliminary determination on the eligibility of applications. The preliminary determination may find that only a portion of the gift is eligible for matching grants. The Coordinating Board shall communicate this determination to all eligible public institutions.
(3) Each institution shall have no less than thirty (30) calendar days from receipt of preliminary determinations to submit an appeal to the Internal Review Committee regarding a preliminary determination not to fund an application. An institution may provide corrective or explanatory information in their appeal which may include administrative corrections.
(4) The Commissioner shall review and recommend a decision on appealed applications.
(i) Certification. The applications recommended for approval by the Internal Review Committee and the Commissioner's decisions on appealed applications shall be presented at a quarterly meeting of the Board. The Board shall make the final determination of certification for each eligible gift. The Board may find only a portion of the gift to be eligible for matching grants. Certified eligible gifts shall be added to the queue for state matching grants in chronological order by date of certification.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403411
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6548
SUBCHAPTER W. TEXAS WORKING OFF-CAMPUS: REINFORCING KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS (WORKS) INTERNSHIP PROGRAM
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts the repeal of Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 21, Subchapter W, §§21.700 - 21.707, Texas Working Off-Campus: Reinforcing Knowledge and Skills (WORKS) Internship Program, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2904). The rules will not be republished.
The adopted repeal relocates these rules to another chapter, allowing the Coordinating Board to administer the Texas Working Off-Campus: Reinforcing Knowledge and Skills (WORKS) Internship Program. Texas Education Code, Chapter 56, Subchapter E-1, Section 56.0856, gives the Coordinating Board the authority to adopt rules to enforce, the requirements, conditions, and limitations provided by the subchapter.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the repeal.
The repeal is adopted under Texas Education Code, Chapter 56, Subchapter E-1, Section 56.0856, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules to enforce, the requirements, conditions, and limitations provided by the subchapter.
The adopted repeal affects Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 21, Subchapter W, Sections 21.700 - 21.707, relating to the Texas Working Off-Campus: Reinforcing Knowledge and Skills (WORKS) Internship Program.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403412
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6267
SUBCHAPTER N. TEXAS LEADERSHIP SCHOLARS PROGRAM
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments to Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 22, Subchapter N, §22.288, Eligible Students, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3094). The rule will not be republished.
The adopted amendment clarifies a student's eligibility requirements and the requirements of the participating institution if a student no longer meets the financial need criteria.
Texas Education Code (TEC), Chapter 61, Subchapter T-3, requires the Coordinating Board to adopt rules for the administration of the program, including rules providing for the amount and permissible uses of a scholarship awarded under the program. The amended section provides clarity and guidance to students, participating institutions, and Coordinating Board staff for the program's implementation.
Rule 22.288 outlines the eligibility requirements students must meet to allow an institution to select a student as a scholar under the Texas Leadership Scholars Program. The requirements of this section establish a minimum criteria for a student to be eligible to receive a scholarship. Specifically, the amended section clarifies that a student must apply for financial aid every eligible year. If a student no longer meets the financial need criteria, a student may remain in the program. In addition, the institution shall make efforts to cover the student's tuition and fees, but is not required to do so. The amendment does not change the number or amount of scholarships available for award.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 61.897, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules as necessary to implement the Texas Leadership Scholars Program.
The adopted amendment affects Texas Education Code, Sections 61.891 - 61.897.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403413
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6537
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 22, Subchapter R, §§22.360 - 22.369, Nursing Students Scholarship Program, with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3096). The rules will be republished.
This new subchapter outlines the authority and purpose, definitions, institutional eligibility requirements, student eligibility requirements, conditions for continued or discontinued eligibility, hardship provisions, scholarship amounts, allocation methodology, and disbursement procedures for a scholarship program to support vocational and professional nursing students. The Coordinating Board used negotiated rulemaking to develop these rules. The Coordinating Board will make reports of the negotiated rulemaking committee available upon request.
Rule 22.360 establishes the authority for the subchapter and outlines the program's purpose. Texas Education Code (TEC), Chapter 61, Subchapter L, denotes the relevant sections for this program because the subchapter authorizes both a scholarship and loan repayment assistance program. The Coordinating Board is given authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nursing Students Scholarship Program under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656.
Rule 22.361 establishes definitions for relevant words or terms throughout the subchapter. The definition of "professional nursing program" in paragraph (1) includes both undergraduate and graduate degrees in professional nursing, including both associate and bachelor's degree programs. The Coordinating Board is given authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nursing Students Scholarship Program under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656.
Rule 22.362 establishes that institutions of higher education, private or independent institutions of higher education, or an institution described by Texas Education Code, Section 61.651(1)(C), are eligible to participate in the program, provided they enter an agreement with the Coordinating Board and are approved by April 1 each fiscal year. Institutions described by Texas Education Code, Section 61.651(1)(C), are included to align with statutory changes made by Senate Bill (SB) 25 during the 88th legislative session. Subsection (b)(3) provides for a later approval deadline for the 2024 - 2025 academic year to allow for adoption of the proposed rules. This section is implemented to provide for consistent administration of the program by the Coordinating Board. The Coordinating Board is given authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nursing Students Scholarship Program under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656.
Rule 22.363 establishes eligibility for students to participate in the scholarship program, including Texas residency, financial need, enrollment on at least a half-time basis in a professional or vocational nursing program, as defined in §22.361 of this subchapter (relating to Definitions), and satisfactory academic progress requirements. This section is implemented to ensure that appropriated funds for this program are offered to students in a manner that is most impactful, both in meeting the students' financial needs and the state's growing need for qualified vocational and professional nurses. The Coordinating Board is given authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nursing Students Scholarship Program under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656.
Rule 22.364 establishes prioritization criteria for eligible institutions when appropriated funds are insufficient to offer scholarships to all eligible students. Subsections (a) and (b) provide that priority shall be given to students who received a scholarship in the prior academic year and to students who demonstrate the greatest financial need, respectively. Subsection (c) provides that priority shall be given to eligible students who are not yet licensed as a registered nurse in Texas or any other state, which will prioritize funds for new nurses to address the state's large deficit of registered nurses. Given the current and anticipated workforce shortages of vocational and registered nurses and the surplus of advanced practice nurses (those with graduate degrees), the Coordinating Board determined prioritizing students who are not yet licensed as a registered nurse would best serve the health care needs of the state at this time. This determination is in line with the agency's authority in Texas Education Code, Section 61.655(c), to establish categories of persons to receive scholarships, including by considering the type of academic degree pursued. Subsection (d) authorizes institutions to set additional prioritization criteria, provided they comply with Coordinating Board rules and Texas Education Code, Section 61.655, to allow institutions greater flexibility in determining how scholarships can be disbursed for maximum positive effects. The Coordinating Board is given authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nursing Students Scholarship Program under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656.
Rule 22.365 establishes additional provisions related to student eligibility. Subsection (a) provides that a student's eligibility ends when the student has attempted 15 semester credit hours, or the equivalent, more than the amount required to complete his or her degree or certificate program. This mechanism, as opposed to a specific semester credit hour limit, was selected due to the varying number of semester credit hours required to complete various vocational and professional nursing programs. This provision ensures that limited appropriated funds are used efficiently. Subsection (b) provides for an otherwise eligible student's semester credit hour limit from subsection (a) to be reset when pursuing a higher-level degree (e.g., vocational nursing to associate degree), provided the student completed the earlier course of study. This provision allows for upskilling within the nursing profession. The Coordinating Board is given authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nursing Students Scholarship Program under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656.
Rule 22.366 provides for hardship provisions that allow institutions to consider otherwise eligible students to receive a scholarship even after failing to meet one of the program's eligibility criteria. The rule lists a non-exhaustive list of potential hardship conditions and requires institutions to document each approved hardship and maintain a publicly available hardship policy. This section is implemented to align with other state financial aid programs and to potentially avert dramatic changes in a student's financial aid emanating from difficult circumstances that may have affected the student's academic performance. The Coordinating Board is given authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nursing Students Scholarship Program under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656.
Rule 22.367 establishes the method by which the Coordinating Board will determine the per-semester maximum scholarship amount. Depending on the type of institution, these amounts are tied to the maximum grant amounts of other state financial aid grant programs: Texas Educational Opportunity Grant (TEOG) for public junior colleges, state colleges, and technical colleges; Toward EXcellence, Access, and Success (TEXAS) Grant for public universities and health related institutions; and Tuition Equalization Grant (TEG) for private and independent universities and institutions described by Texas Education Code, Section 61.651(1)(C).
Subsection (a)(3) sets the award maximum as one half the TEG maximum because that figure is calculated on an annualized basis, whereas TEOG and TEXAS Grant maximums are semester-based. These award maximums are implemented to create administrative ease and flexibility for institutions, as well as to weight the allocation methodology established in §22.368 of this subchapter (relating to Allocation of Funds) based on the varying tuition and fee costs of the different types of institutions included in this program.
Subsection (c) prohibits the use of a Nursing Students Scholarship as matching funds for students also receiving TEOG or a TEXAS grant. This addition was included to ensure the program functions as new financial aid for vocational and professional nursing students, rather than a replacement for institutional aid that a student already would have received. The Coordinating Board is given authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nursing Students Scholarship Program under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656.
Rule 22.368 establishes the allocation methodology for the program. Funds will be distributed based on each participating institution's proportional share of the overall need. Institutional need is calculated by multiplying the number of eligible students at an institution with an Expected Family Contribution (EFC) less than or equal to the Pell Grant eligibility cap by the institution's maximum scholarship amount per semester, established in §22.367 of this subchapter (relating to Scholarship Amount). This methodology was established to ensure a fair distribution of funds to participating eligible institutions, while weighting the distribution to account for the relatively higher cost of attendance at four-year institutions.
Subsections (a)(4), (5), and (6) relate to the Coordinating Board's procedures in calculating the allocation for a given year and notifying institutions about the results. These provisions are common throughout the agency's financial aid programs and are included to ensure that allocations are conducted in a consistent and transparent manner.
Subsection (b) limits the total amount of scholarship funds allocated in a fiscal year to an institution described by Texas Education Code, Section 61.651(1)(C), to ten (10) percent of the total allocation. This subsection is a requirement of Texas Education Code, Section 61.656(e), which was a provision of SB 25, passed during the 88th legislative session. The Coordinating Board is given authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nursing Students Scholarship Program under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656.
Rule 22.369 outlines the Coordinating Board's standard practices related to disbursement of funds to institutions and unexpected reductions in funding. These provisions are common throughout the agency's financial aid programs and are included to ensure programs are administered efficiently and transparently.
The following comments were received regarding the adoption of the new rules.
Comment: St. Edward's University commented regarding its concern that, because its nursing degree programs are new and have not been reported previously in its Financial Aid Database submissions, that the university may not be considered for funding.
Response: The Coordinating Board agrees that because the nursing degree programs at St. Edward's University will not be reflected in its most recent Financial Aid Database (FAD) submissions, the university likely would be excluded from the allocation of funds during the program's first year (Fiscal Year 2025).
The provisions within §22.368 (relating to Allocation of Funds) agreed upon during negotiated rulemaking process were designed to ensure that appropriated funds were distributed equitably among institutions based on their respective populations of nursing students with financial need, weighted by cost using the award maximums from the TEXAS Grant, Texas Educational Opportunity Grant, and Tuition Equalization Grant programs. To accomplish this, as with other scholarship and grant programs, the Coordinating Board relies on FAD submissions to conduct its allocation calculations accurately and efficiently.
St. Edward's University is not uniquely disadvantaged; the interaction between FAD submission and allocation calculation would affect any institution with a nursing degree program in its first year of operation. Accordingly, no change is being made in response to this comment.
Comment: The Texas Nurses Association (TNA) commented that while generally they agree and support the proposed rules, they recommend changing the limitation of scholarships from only being offered to undergraduate students to including graduate students. TNA's understanding is that this limitation targets the funding where the need is greatest, the Registered Nurse (RN) pipeline. However, the comment notes that part of the deficit of RNs is due to the lack of qualified faculty serving in Texas. Since nursing school faculty typically must obtain a graduate degree to be able to teach so to incentivize the production of faculty, TNA recommends expanding eligibility to include graduate students.
Response: The Coordinating Board acknowledges the limitation, and the definition of Professional Nursing Program has been updated to include graduate students.
The new sections are adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the program.
The adopted new sections affect Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 22, Subchapter R.
§22.360.Authority and Purpose.
(a) Authority. Authority for this subchapter is provided in the Texas Education Code, Chapter 61, Subchapter L, Financial Aid for Professional Nursing Students and Vocational Nursing Students. This subchapter establishes procedures to administer Texas Education Code §§61.651, 61.652, and 61.655 - 61.659.
(b) Purpose. The purpose of the Nursing Students Scholarship Program is to promote the health care and educational needs of this state by providing scholarships to eligible professional and vocational nursing students.
§22.361.Definitions.
In addition to the words and terms defined in §22.1 of this chapter (relating to Definitions), the following words and terms, when used in this subchapter, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
(1) Professional Nursing Program--A course of study at an eligible institution leading to an undergraduate or graduate degree in professional nursing.
(2) Program--The Nursing Students Scholarship Program.
(3) Scholarship(s)--A scholarship offered through this subchapter.
(4) Vocational Nursing Program--A course of study at an eligible institution intended to prepare a student for licensure as a licensed vocational nurse.
§22.362.Eligible Institutions.
(a) Eligibility.
(1) A college or university defined as an institution of higher education as defined by Texas Education Code, §61.003(8), private or independent institution of higher education as defined by Texas Education Code, §61.003(15), or an institution described by Texas Education Code, §61.651(1)(C), is eligible to participate in the program.
(2) No participating institution may, on the grounds of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age or disability exclude an individual from participation in, or deny the benefits of the program described in this subchapter.
(3) A participating institution must follow the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI (Public Law 88-353) in avoiding discrimination in admissions.
(b) Approval.
(1) Agreement. Each eligible institution must enter into an agreement with the Coordinating Board, the terms of which shall be prescribed by the Commissioner or his/her designee, prior to being approved to participate in the program.
(2) Approval Deadline. An institution must be approved by April 1 in order for qualified students enrolled in that institution to be eligible to receive scholarships in the following state fiscal year.
(3) Notwithstanding subsection (a)(2) of this section, for the 2024 - 2025 academic year, an institution may indicate intent to participate in the program by the administrative deadline established by the Commissioner.
§22.363.Eligible Students.
To be eligible for a scholarship through the program, a student must:
(1) be a resident of Texas;
(2) show financial need;
(3) be enrolled in a professional or vocational nursing program on at least a half-time basis; and
(4) have made satisfactory academic progress in accordance with the student's institutions' financial aid academic progress requirements.
§22.364.Priority in Scholarships to Students.
(a) If appropriations for the program are insufficient to allow scholarships to all eligible students, priority shall be given to those students who received a scholarship in the prior academic year and continue to demonstrate eligibility pursuant to this subchapter.
(b) In determining student eligibility for a scholarship pursuant to §22.363 of this subchapter (relating to Eligible Students), priority shall be given to those students who demonstrate the greatest financial need at the time the offer is made.
(c) In determining student eligibility for a scholarship pursuant to §22.363 of this subchapter (relating to Eligible Students), priority shall be given to those students enrolled in professional nursing or vocational nursing programs who are not yet licensed as a registered nurse in Texas or any other state.
(d) An institution may set additional prioritization criteria for the awarding of scholarships, so long as such criteria comply with this subchapter and Texas Education Code, §61.655.
§22.365.Discontinuation of Eligibility or Non-Eligibility.
(a) Unless granted a hardship extension in accordance with §22.366 of this subchapter (relating to Hardship Provisions), a student's eligibility ends when the student has attempted 15 semester credit hours, or the equivalent, more than the amount required to complete the degree or certificate program in which the student is enrolled.
(b) In determining eligibility with respect to subsection (a) of this section, a student who has received a scholarship during a previous course of study is considered to have started the student's new course of study with zero semester credit hours, or the equivalent, attempted if the student:
(1) meets all other eligibility criteria; and
(2) completed the previous course of study by earning the intended degree or certificate.
§22.366.Hardship Provisions.
(a) In the event of a hardship or for other good cause, the Program Officer at a participating institution may allow an otherwise eligible student to receive a scholarship:
(1) while failing to make satisfactory academic progress in accordance with the institution's financial aid academic progress requirements;
(2) while enrolled less than half-time; or
(3) while enrolled beyond the scholarship receipt limit, as defined in §22.365(a) of this subchapter (relating to Discontinuation of Eligibility or Non-Eligibility).
(b) Hardship conditions may include, but are not limited to:
(1) documentation of a severe illness or other debilitating condition that may affect the student's academic performance;
(2) documentation that the student is responsible for the care of a sick, injured, or needy person and that the student's provision of care may affect his or her academic performance;
(3) documentation of the birth of a child or placement of a child with the student for adoption or foster care, that may affect the student's academic performance; or
(4) the requirement of less than half-time enrollment to complete one's degree or certificate plan.
(c) Documentation of the hardship circumstances approved for a student to receive a scholarship must be kept in the student's files, and the institution must identify students approved for a scholarship based on a hardship to the Coordinating Board.
(d) Each institution shall adopt a hardship policy under this section and have the policy available in writing in the financial aid office for public review upon request.
§22.367.Scholarship Amount.
(a) Scholarship Amount. Each state fiscal year, the maximum scholarship amount per semester shall be:
(1) for institutions eligible to offer grants through the Texas Educational Opportunity Grant Program, the maximum grant amount established in §22.261(b) of this chapter (relating to Grant Amounts);
(2) for institutions eligible to offer grants through the Toward EXcellence, Access, and Success (TEXAS) Grant Program, the maximum grant amount established in §22.234(b) of this chapter (relating to Grant Amounts); or
(3) for institutions eligible to offer grants through the Tuition Equalization Grant Program or an institution described by Texas Education Code, §61.651(1)(C), one half of the maximum grant amount established in §22.28(a)(3)(A) of this chapter (relating to Award Amounts and Adjustments).
(b) The amount of a scholarship plus any other gift aid may not exceed the student's financial need.
(c) For an eligible student who also is a Texas Educational Opportunity Grant or Toward EXcellence, Access, and Success (TEXAS) Grant recipient, a scholarship offered under this subchapter may not be used as financial aid to meet the requirements of §22.261(c) (for TEOG recipients) or §22.234(c) (for TEXAS Grant recipients) of this chapter (relating to Grant Amounts respectively).
§22.368.Allocation of Funds.
(a) Allocations. Allocations are to be determined as follows:
(1) Each institution's percent of the available funds will equal the ratio of its institutional need to the state-wide need.
(2) An institution's institutional need is calculated by multiplying:
(A) the number of students it reported in the most recent certified Financial Aid Database submission who met the following criteria:
(i) were classified as Texas residents;
(ii) were enrolled in a vocational or professional nursing program on at least a half-time basis; and
(iii) have a 9-month Expected Family Contribution, calculated using federal methodology, less than or equal to the Federal Pell Grant eligibility cap for the year reported in the Financial Aid Database submission; and
(B) the institution's maximum scholarship amount, as determined by the Coordinating Board under §22.367(a) of this subchapter (relating to Scholarship Amount).
(3) The state-wide need is calculated as the sum of all eligible institutions' institutional need.
(4) Allocations for both years of the state appropriations' biennium will be completed at the same time. The three most recent certified Financial Aid Database submissions will be used to forecast the data utilized in the calculation of the allocation for the second year of the biennium. Institutions will receive notification of their allocations for both years of the biennium at the same time.
(5) Notwithstanding subsection (a)(4) of this section, allocations for Fiscal Year 2025 will be based on the most recent certified Financial Aid Database submission.
(6) Allocation calculations will be shared with all participating institutions for comment and verification prior to final posting and the institutions will be given ten (10) working days, beginning the day of the notice's distribution and excluding State holidays, to confirm that the allocation report accurately reflects the data they submitted or to notify the Coordinating Board in writing of any inaccuracies.
(b) Limited Allocation for Certain Institutions. Notwithstanding the allocation methodology established in subsection (a) of this section, an institution described by Texas Education Code, §61.651(1)(C), may not receive more than ten (10) percent of the total amount of scholarship funds allocated in a fiscal year. Excess funds that would otherwise be allocated to such an institution will instead be allocated to the remaining eligible institutions according to the allocation methodology established in subsection (a) of this section.
§22.369.Disbursement of Funds.
(a) Disbursement of Funds to Institutions. As requested by institutions throughout the academic year, the Coordinating Board shall forward to each participating institution a portion of its allocation of funds for timely disbursement to students. Institutions will have until the close of business on August 1, or the first working day thereafter if it falls on a weekend or holiday, to encumber program funds from their allocation. After that date, institutions lose claim to any funds in the current fiscal year not yet drawn down from the Coordinating Board for timely disbursement to students. Funds released in this manner in the first year of the biennium become available to the institution for use in the second year of the biennium. Funds released in this manner in the second year of the biennium become available to the Coordinating Board for utilization in scholarship processing. Should these unspent funds result in additional funding available for the next biennium's program, revised allocations, calculated according to the allocation methodology outlined in this rule, will be issued to participating institutions during the fall semester.
(b) Reductions in Funding.
(1) If annual funding for the program is reduced after the start of a fiscal year, the Coordinating Board may take steps to help distribute the impact of reduced funding across all participating institutions by an across-the-board percentage decrease in all institutions' allocations.
(2) If annual funding is reduced prior to the start of a fiscal year, the Coordinating Board may recalculate the allocations according to the allocation methodology outlined in this rule for the affected fiscal year based on available dollars.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403415
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6365
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 23, Subchapter A, §§23.1 - 23.3, General Provisions, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2905). The rules will not be republished.
This new section creates general provisions that apply to all education loan repayment programs administered by the Coordinating Board under Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 23.
Rule 23.1, Definitions, provides definitions for terminology that is common across all subchapters in Chapter 23. The definition for "Board," "Coordinating Board" and "Commissioner" are included to ensure consistency throughout the rules for education loan repayment programs. Texas Education Code, §§56.3575, 61.537, 61.608, 61.656, 61.9828, 61.9840, and 61.9959, provide the Coordinating Board with the authority to establish rules for the administration of the education loan repayment programs.
Rule 23.2, Eligible Lender and Eligible Education Loan, outlines the requirements that must be met for a loan to be considered eligible for repayment through any education loan repayment program in Chapter 23. This includes the requirements by which both the lender and the loan are assessed to determine eligibility. The requirements represent the consolidation of requirements outlined in the subchapters in Chapter 23 to ensure consistency across all programs. Additional details have been provided regarding the allowance for loans to be eligible for two different loan repayment programs if the other program is a federal program that requires a state matching requirement. Texas Education Code, §§56.3575, 61.537, 61.608, 61.656, 61.9828, 61.9840, and 61.9959, provide the Coordinating Board with the authority to establish rules for the administration of the education loan repayment programs.
Rule 23.3, Method of Disbursement, indicates that all education loan repayment program disbursements are made directly to the lender and that the Coordinating Board adheres to appropriate IRS reporting regulations. The Coordinating Board elects to disburse directly to the lender for all education loan repayment programs, rather than co-payable to the lender and borrower, to create greater assurance that all disbursements will be appropriately applied to the eligible loans. The Coordinating Board's adherence to appropriate IRS regulations is placed in the general provisions to create greater transparency of this requirement across all education loan repayment programs. Texas Education Code, §§56.3575, 61.537, 61.608, 61.656, 61.9828, 61.9840, and 61.9959, provide the Coordinating Board with the authority to establish rules for the administration of the education loan repayment programs.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the new rules.
The new sections are adopted under Texas Education Code, Sections 56.3575, 61.537, 61.608, 61.656, 61.9828, 61.9840, and 61.9959, which provide the Coordinating Board with the authority to establish rules for the administration of the education loan repayment programs.
The adopted new sections affect Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 23.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403417
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6365
19 TAC §§23.187 - 23.190, 23.193
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts amendments and new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 23, Subchapter G, §23.190, Nursing Faculty Loan Repayment Assistance Program, with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 10, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3100). The rule will be republished. Sections 23.187 - 23.189 and 23.193 are adopted without changes and will not be republished.
The amendments and new rule redefine Coordinating Board terminology used throughout the subchapter, expand program eligibility to nursing faculty members employed less than full-time, clarify eligibility provisions related to prior employment as nursing faculty, allow the Coordinating Board to set the maximum annual loan repayment assistance amount for the program based on available funds and the number of eligible applicants, and to prorate the maximum award for part-time nursing faculty based on hours worked in relation to their full-time counterparts, and eliminate the previous annual award limit to align with statute.
Section 23.187, Definitions, is amended to eliminate the definition of "Coordinating Board," which is being included in the Definitions section of a new General Provisions subchapter that apply throughout Chapter 23. This change is being implemented to align terminology throughout the chapter. The definition of "service period" in this section is unchanged. Although part-time nursing faculty may now be eligible for loan repayment assistance through this program, their eligibility and awarding must be based on a year of employment, as referenced in TEC, §§61.9822(2) and 61.9823(a). In other words, employment in only a portion of a service period (e.g., for only one semester in an academic year) does not constitute part-time employment for the purposes of this program.
Section 23.187(4) is amended to create a definition of "full-time," to allow the Coordinating Board the ability to prorate loan repayment assistance awards for part-time nursing faculty based on the proportion of hours worked by a part-time applicant to a full-time nursing faculty member. This addition is being completed to implement statutory changes made to TEC, §61.9823, during the 88th legislative session.
Section 23.188, Applicant Eligibility, is amended to expand the eligibility requirement for employment status to allow part-time or full-time nursing faculty to participate. This amendment is being completed to implement statutory changes made to TEC, §61.9822, during the 88th legislative session.
Section 23.188 is further amended to clarify that an applicant must have been employed as nursing faculty for at least one service period during the last year to be eligible for the program. This change is being implemented to align with the program's intended function, which is to offer loan repayment assistance based on current and immediately recent employment as nursing faculty.
Section 23.189, Applicant Ranking Priorities, is amended to change the section title. This change is implemented to provide greater consistency between agency rules governing the various loan repayment assistance programs.
Section 23.190, Amount of Repayment Assistance, is adopted to allow the Commissioner to determine annually the maximum loan repayment assistance amount for a full-time applicant under the program and to prorate this maximum for eligible part-time nursing faculty. This addition is for the purpose of implementing statutory changes made to TEC, §61.9823, during the 88th legislative session. Establishing the annual maximum has been structured in a way that supports the Coordinating Board's efforts to allocate all money available to the board for the purpose of providing loan repayment assistance under this subchapter. The prior content of this section has been included in new subchapter A, along with other general provisions applicable to all Chapter 23 programs.
Section 23.193, Limitations, is amended to remove the $7,000 annual award limit to allow the Commissioner more flexibility on determining award amounts for the program. Provisions related to the Commissioner setting the annual maximum repayment assistance and proration for part-time nursing faculty are addressed in proposed amendments to §23.190, see above. This update is being completed to implement statutory changes made to TEC, §61.9823, during the 88th legislative session.
Section 23.193 is further amended by adding paragraph (4), which clarifies that the amount of loan repayment assistance offered to an individual may not exceed the unpaid principal and interest owed on eligible education loans. This addition codifies existing agency practice and aligns with similar rule provisions in other loan repayment assistance programs administered by the agency.
Subsequent to the posting of the rules in the Texas Register, the following changes are incorporated into the adopted rule.
Section 23.190, Amount of Repayment Assistance, was updated to provide greater clarity as to how the determination is made regarding the annual maximum assistance for the program, as well as how determinations are made regarding the maximum annual assistance for an individual participant and the maximum annual assistance for part-time nurses. The proposed rule was amended to provide better specification of the roles of the Commissioner and agency staff in determining maximum and individual award amounts.
The following comment was received regarding the adoption of the amendments.
Comment: The Texas Nurses Association (TNA) commented to communicate its support for the proposed rules.
Response: The Coordinating Board appreciates this comment.
The amendments and new rule are adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 61.9828, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nursing Faculty Loan Repayment Assistance Program.
The adopted amendments and new rule affect Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 23, Subchapter G.
§23.190.Amount of Repayment Assistance.
(a) The Commissioner shall determine the maximum annual loan repayment assistance amount offered under this subchapter to nursing faculty members working full-time, as defined in §23.187 of this subchapter (relating to Definitions). In any given year, the maximum amount of assistance is a function of the total amount of available funding and the number of eligible applicants.
(b) In any given year, a participant in the program may not receive assistance greater than 20 percent of the participant's loan balance as was demonstrated when the participant was first approved for assistance under this subchapter.
(c) The amount of loan repayment assistance calculated for an individual participant based on subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall be pro-rated for a nursing faculty member working part-time. The pro-ration shall be based on the proportion of hours worked by the nursing faculty member in comparison to the hours worked by nursing faculty members working full-time.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403418
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 10, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6365
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts the repeal of Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 23, Subchapter G, §§23.190 - 23.192 and 23.194, Nursing Faculty Loan Repayment Assistance Program, without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2907). The rules will not be republished.
The adopted repeal removes sections that were either moved to other sections within the program or are redundant with the creation of the new Subchapter A in Chapter 23.
Texas Education Code, Section 61.9828, provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules for the administration of the Nursing Faculty Loan Repayment Assistance Program.
The repeal of these sections was necessary to reduce redundancy with new rules under the General Provisions, Subchapter A in Chapter 23, that apply to the entire chapter.
No comments were received regarding the adoption of the repeal.
The repeal is adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 61.9828, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to adopt rules for the administration of the Nursing Faculty Loan Repayment Assistance Program.
The adopted repeal affects Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 23, Subchapter G.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403419
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6365
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (Coordinating Board) adopts new rules in Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 23, Subchapter K, §23.304, Nurse Loan Repayment Assistance Program, with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 3, 2024, issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 2907). The rule will be republished. Sections 23.300 - 23.303 and 23.305 are adopted without changes and will not be republished.
This subchapter establishes the program's authority and purpose, outlines definitions for necessary words and terms, and creates applicant eligibility criteria, ranking priorities, repayment assistance amounts, and limitations for the program. The Coordinating Board is given authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the Nurse Loan Repayment Assistance Program under Texas Education Code, §61.656.
Rule 23.300, Authority and Purpose, establishes the authority and purpose of the program, which is to promote the health care needs of this state by encouraging qualified nurses to continue to practice in Texas. This addition is adopted to clearly state the Coordinating Board's intentions in administering the program to conform with subchapters related to the agency's other financial aid programs.
Rule 23.301, Definitions, establishes necessary definitions for words and terms used in subsequent rules. This includes outlining various classifications of nurses based on state licensure standards, designating the number of hours needed to be full-time to conform to many employers' minimum standards, using Primary Care Health Professional Shortage Area scores as a proxy for nursing shortage in a given geography, and defining "rural county" based on a common definition in Texas law that is easily operationalized. This addition is implemented to avoid ambiguity in the rules and to ensure the subchapter is administered consistently.
Rule 23.302, Applicant Eligibility, establishes eligibility criteria for applicants to the program, including employer verification of the applicant's employment as a nurse, documentation of licensure, information related to the applicant's eligible education loans, and any other documentation that may be required. This addition is implemented to ensure state funds appropriated to this program are disbursed to persons currently employed as nurses in this state and that the Coordinating Board has the information needed to administer the program consistently and efficiently.
Rule 23.303, Applicant Ranking Priorities, establishes the prioritization criteria the Coordinating Board will use in the event that insufficient funds are available in a year to offer loan repayment assistance to all eligible applicants. Priority will be given based on a priority deadline set by the agency, to renewal applications versus initial-year applications, applications from nurses employed in rural counties, applications from nurses employed by or in Primary Care Health Professional Shortage Areas with higher scores, to different licensure classifications of nurses (prioritizing areas of greatest shortage statewide), and date of application submission. This addition is implemented to ensure that limited state funds are being employed to have the greatest impact in promoting the health care needs of the state.
Rule 23.304, Amount of Repayment Assistance, is adopted to allow the Commissioner to establish the maximum annual loan repayment assistance amounts for nurses of different licensure classifications and outlines how these amounts can be prorated for eligible nurses working part-time. Establishing the annual maximum has been structured in a way that supports the Coordinating Board's efforts to allocate all money available to the board for the purpose of providing loan repayment assistance under this subchapter. This addition is implemented to allow the greatest flexibility to the agency in administering the program, depending on the amount of available funds and number of eligible applicants each year.
Rule 23.305, Limitations, outlines limitations to the program. Subsection (a) relates to statutory requirements limiting the amount of assistance that can be offered to eligible persons for repayment for education loans for education received at an institution described by Texas Education Code, §61.651(1)(C). This addition aligns with statutory changes made to Texas Education Code, §61.656, in Senate Bill 25 during the 88th legislative session. Subsection (c) establishes the number of years an individual may receive loan repayment assistance under this program. Three years was selected to align with other Loan Repayment Assistance Programs and to ensure consistent availability to the program for new applicants, reinforcing the program's ability to retain qualified nurses statewide.
Subsequent to the posting of the rules in the Texas Register, the following changes are incorporated into the adopted rule.
Section 23.304, Amount of Repayment Assistance, was updated to provide greater clarity as to how the determination is made regarding the annual maximum assistance for the program, as well as how the determinations are made regarding the maximum annual assistance for an individual participant and the maximum annual assistance for part-time nurses. The proposed rule was amended to provide better specification of the roles of the Commissioner and agency staff in determining maximum and individual award amounts.
The following comments were received regarding the adoption of the new rules.
Comment: Texas Nurse Practitioners (TNP) commented regarding the prioritization criteria within §23.303 (relating to Applicant Ranking Priorities). Specifically, TNP requested the removal of §23.303(a)(5), which states that, "Applications from registered nurses shall be given priority over applications from licensed vocational nurses, who shall be given priority over applications from advanced practice nurses." The comment notes the multiple functions advanced practice nurses serve in the health care workforce, including as nursing faculty and mental health care providers, as justification for "putting all nurses on an even level."
Response: The Coordinating Board appreciates this comment and provides this clarification. Regarding the prioritization criteria in §23.303, paragraphs (a)(1) - (6) are not independent of each other. In other words, all registered nurses (RN) and licensed vocational nurses (LVN) will not be prioritized over advanced practice nurses (APN). Rather, within a group of applicants whose employers have the same Health Professional Shortage Area score, the group will be prioritized, RNs > LVNs > APNs. The Coordinating Board intends and expects many advanced practice nurses to receive loan repayment assistance through this program, especially those serving in rural counties and parts of the state with the most severe shortages of health professionals. As such, no change is being made in response to this comment.
The Coordinating Board also appreciates the many and varied functions advanced practice nurses serve. Regarding their functions as nursing faculty and mental health care providers, specifically, the Coordinating Board notes that separate loan repayment programs exist to assist eligible nursing faculty and mental health professionals. Rules for these programs can be found in the Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 23, Subchapters G and D, respectively. Qualified advanced practice nurses are eligible to participate in either of these programs.
Comment: The Texas Nurses Association (TNA) commented to communicate its support for the proposed rules.
Response: The Coordinating Board appreciates this comment.
The new sections are adopted under Texas Education Code, Section 61.656, which provides the Coordinating Board with the authority to establish rules as necessary to administer the program.
The adopted new sections affect Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 1, Chapter 23, Subchapter K.
§23.304.Amount of Repayment Assistance.
(a) The Commissioner shall determine the maximum annual loan repayment assistance amounts offered under this subchapter to nurses working full-time, as defined in §23.301 of this subchapter (relating to Definitions). In any given year, the maximum amounts of assistance are a function of the total amount of available funding, the number of eligible applicants, and the average loan balances of program participants. Maximum amounts shall be established for the following categories of nurses:
(1) Licensed Vocational Nurses;
(2) Registered Nurses; and
(3) Advanced Practice Nurses.
(b) In any given year, a participant in the program may not receive assistance greater than one-third of the participant’s loan balance as was demonstrated when the participant was first approved for assistance under this subchapter.
(c) The amount of loan repayment assistance calculated for an individual participant based on subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall be pro-rated for a nurse working part-time. The pro-ration shall be based on the proportion of hours worked by the nursing faculty member in comparison to the hours worked by a nurse working full-time.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403420
Nichole Bunker-Henderson
General Counsel
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 3, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 427-6365
CHAPTER 61. SCHOOL DISTRICTS
SUBCHAPTER A. BOARD OF TRUSTEES RELATIONSHIP
The State Board of Education (SBOE) adopts an amendment to §61.2, concerning nominations of trustees for military reservation school districts and Boys Ranch Independent School District. The amendment is adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the May 17, 2024 issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 3462) and the correction of error published in the August 2, 2024 issue of the Texas Register (49 TexReg 5800). The section will not be republished. The adopted amendment reflects changes made by House Bill (HB) 4210, 88th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2023, to the SBOE's process for appointing trustees for military reservation districts and add a definition for the term "commanding officer."
REASONED JUSTIFICATION: Texas Education Code (TEC), §11.352, requires the SBOE to appoint a board of three or five trustees for each military reservation district established under TEC, §11.351. Enlisted personnel and officers may be appointed to the school board, but a majority of the trustees must be civilians. To be eligible to serve, one must either live or be employed on the military reservation. The trustees are selected from a list of people provided by the commanding officer of the military reservation.
HB 4210, 88th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2023, amended TEC, §11.352(b) and (c), to establish that a person who retires from active duty or civilian service while serving as a member of the board of trustees of a military reservation district may continue to serve for the remainder of his or her term. The bill also changed the SBOE's responsibility to adopt rules for the governance of special-purpose districts from permissive to required.
To implement HB 4210, the adopted amendment adds new §61.2(e) to specify that a trustee of a military reservation school district who retires from active duty or civilian service while serving as a member of the board of trustees may continue to serve for the remainder of his or her term.
In addition, the amendment defines "commanding officer" for the purposes of this section.
The SBOE approved the amendment for first reading and filing authorization at its April 12, 2024 meeting and for second reading and final adoption at its June 28, 2024 meeting.
In accordance with TEC, §7.102(f), the SBOE approved the amendment for adoption by a vote of two-thirds of its members to specify an effective date earlier than the beginning of the 2025-2026 school year. The earlier effective date would provide clarity on who is eligible to serve on a board of trustees of a military reservation school district before the beginning of the 2024-2025 school year. The effective date is 20 days after filing as adopted with the Texas Register.
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSES: The public comment period on the proposal began May 17, 2024, and ended at 5:00 p.m. on June 17, 2024. The SBOE also provided an opportunity for registered oral and written comments at its June 2024 meeting in accordance with the SBOE board operating policies and procedures. No public comments were received.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY. The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code, §11.352, as amended by House Bill 4210, 88th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2023, which requires the State Board of Education to appoint a board of three or five trustees for each military reservation district.
CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE. The amendment implements Texas Education Code, §11.352, as amended by House Bill 4210, 88th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2023.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 26, 2024.
TRD-202403374
Cristina De La Fuente-Valadez
Director, Rulemaking
Texas Education Agency
Effective date: August 15, 2024
Proposal publication date: May 17, 2024
For further information, please call: (512) 475-1497