Meeting Minutes: Regents Advisory Committee on Accounts Receivable (RACAR)
Date: April 13, 2005
Location: Macon State College, Continuing Education Building
K, Auditorium
This meeting was a joint meeting held with RACAR, RACSFA and RACRA and was chaired by Donja Tripp (RACAR), Kathleen Caldwell (RACSFA) and John Brown (RACRA).
JOINT TOPICS
Third Party Services (Delivering Excess Funds), Institutional Liabilities Resulting from Students with All “F” Grades
This was presented by John Kolotos from the U.S. Department of Education. View presentation (PDF 21k)
All F's
A question from the group – incomplete grades – do they get treated
as “F”?? John indicated that he would get back with Donja on the
answer to this question. Donja has not heard from him with an answer to this
question.
Must be able to show attendance in at least one day of classes. If only 1 day can be documented it would put the student in a Return of Title IV situation. The school must be able to document that the student did attend; otherwise the funds must go back.
Schools were asking each other if attendance is required. John suggested that we discuss this as a group to determine what other schools are doing. How have some schools been successful with getting faculty to take attendance?
Stored Value Cards – card must be able to be used at any ATM machine to get money
He discussed companies “banks” doing this now by EFT to a bank account, in turn this gets put on a card, and then used by the student.
Currently there is no direct regulation addressing the stored value card.
John said that the DOE is giving the following guidance regarding stored value cards:
- Student must be able to access and cash out the funds.
- Underlying account “Student's account” at bank holding the funds must be FDIC insured.
- With ACH there is a limited time period to make corrections if you transfer too much money. School cannot make claims to the funds on the card – except to correct an error.
- The card cannot be converted to a credit card (DOE does not want the card to be used this way. They are STRONGLY advising schools not to get into this business).
- There can be no charge to the student for issuing the card – only to replace the card.
- Process of getting the funds to the student MUST meet all regulatory timeframes (credit balances are disbursed within 14 days, FWS earnings are paid at least monthly).
- Schools must obtain permission from the student to use the stored value cards.
Third Party Servicer – An entity that enters into a contract with a school to administer any aspect of its federal aid programs, including:
- Determining need/eligibility or certifying loan applications
- Obtaining student and parent authorization
- Receiving, disbursing, or delivering federal aid funds.
- All requirements that apply to schools also apply to servicers.
- The third-party servicer must submit annually a compliance audit to the DOE.
- Schools and servicer are jointly and severally liable. Departments has the right to go after school and/or third-party servicer
- Schools are responsible for notifying the DOE if using a servicer. He indicated if you are unsure if you are using a third-party, call DOE and discuss. Do not report banks.
- An attorney is not a third-party servicer if they are doing some collection activity for you.
If schools have questions regarding third-party servicer issues they can contact Patty Patterson at DOE.
A specific question was asked regarding the HigherOne process. What happens if they don't make a selection? Schools must make sure that they are following the regulations regarding disbursing the funds to the student within 14 days. Schools need to make sure that what happens should the student not make a selection is written into the agreement (contract). If the student does not make a selection, defaulting to a check within the required timeframe would meet the requirement. Otherwise the funds need to be returned to the schools and disbursed within the 14 days. The following comments were made regarding HigherOne:
- It is not sufficient to just notify them that there is a credit balance.
- School must make affirmative action.
- The entire process must take 14 days – from point of generation of the credit balance to disbursement to the student.
- HigherOne should be reported as a third-party servicer.
- HigherOne is notifying the students by e-mail that the funds are available – they argue that they have met the policy – THIS IS NOT CORRECT.
- Student should not have to do anything to receive the funds.
Another question was asked regarding getting a copy of the compliance audit submitted by HigherOne. John indicated that he did not believe that one had been completed.
John indicated that the DOE has been talking with HigherOne and they are currently working through some issues with them at this time.
John is encouraging schools to do their due diligence before entering into contracts. The schools must also feel comfortable with the funds being sent to a third-party servicer.
Question – What if the DOE determines that HigherOne is not in compliance, does it trickle down to the schools? Answer – YES
Question- Would sending the student notification that the check is available for immediate pick-up within the 14 days comply with the regulation? Answer – YES. BUT he went on to say that we cannot coerce the student into making a decision with HigherOne. They cannot be told they will have to wait until the 14th day to pick up the funds in order to try to get them to make a selection.
Question – Can the DOE regulations be updated? Answer – No, not right now. Department of Education must go through negotiated rule making to get a policy changed. This can take up to 2 years. Today John is offering guidance regarding the stored value cards. They are offering a safe harbor at this time.
DON'T forget – the 14 days starts at the point the credit balance is created. Question – If we attempt to direct deposit to a student's account and the account number is incorrect or account has been closed, have we met the requirement? Answer – Yes, technically the requirement has been met.
Kathleen Caldwell released the group for a break.
GSFC ( HOPE, ACCEL, GAcollege411)
Shelley Nickel discussed that the lottery revenue slowed to 4% growth. Most likely will not grow more than 4 to 5%.
HOPE Program has almost doubled in last 4 years to a program with disbursements of $2.5 billion to 837,000 students.
Shelley indicated that they did not feel that the HOPE scholarship fees and/or book funds would be impacted during this year.
GAcollege411 – website was launched February 14, 2005. Expecting updates in July 2005. Online applications should be available and include some improvements to the original launch through improved displays. They anticipate that this will be a work in progress.
The site will have a section for parents and a separate section for students. Students will have a My 411 Account.
Institutions will each have someone that can update things that will be customized for the Universities.
Applications – common application process will be implemented on GAcollge411. Tonya Lam is working with groups on what this will look like. They anticipate having a long and short form. Schools will be able to have a supplemental form that can personalize the application process. Technical and private schools will be able to personalize the application process.
FAFSA – Can pull information from student profile to complete the FAFSA if you link from this site to the DOE site to complete the on-line application.
Transcripts – Beta testing begins late spring. Institutions will be able to upload transcripts as well as download transcripts. This process should be fully operational by 1/1/07. This is definitely something that the high schools are excited about.
Paying for College – This will have an information section regarding on how to pay for collect. It will link them back to GSFC. Schools that are using the Direct Lending program are concerned that the parents will be linked to the GSFC and they will be applying for the incorrect loans. They are going to make sure that students applying to schools participating in DL are not direct to GSFC. It will also have information on the 529 plan.
Adult Learner – New component. They are currently defining what would be on this section of the site. Expected July, 2005.
Question – Loan application. How does this work if they haven't been accepted. The site will direct them to the financial aid office.
The site will list the main point of contact as the financial aid office.
Question – Will schools get preliminary GPA's? Answer– Yes
Question – What about transcripts for transfer students? Answer – The initial focus is on K-12. Opportunity may be there in the future for college.
Question – How can schools market website? Answer – Word of mouth. They indicated that schools could talk on TV shows. There are some downloadable documents on the website that could help schools market the site.
Question – What if students are having technical issues? Answer - They will be directed to the GSFC call center.
Some schools are concerned about searches on the website for programs and majors. One example is a school that indicates that they have an Accounting Degree. There is a difference between a technical accounting degree and a 4 year program. Currently the information on the schools is coming from Petersons. They are currently looking for another avenue of data dump to be able to make distinctions.
Question – What are the mechanics of receiving the transcript? Answer – The high schools will have a link to the GSFC database to convert to a 4.0 scale. This should all be 100% electronic.
Question – Will there be a better deadline for submitting the final transcripts? Answer – Yes, but nothing is set in stone.
Application Fees – They are on schedule. Admissions should have received an institutional agreement. With this should have been several contracts.
- New agreement with BOR for information from Petersons
- On-line application
- Agreement to indicate that we do want to participate in download of transcripts.
High School Transcripts – 1/1/2007. All high schools must go live on electronic transcripts. In addition to this they are working on a common transcript and common grading scale across the state. Weights for AP have not been determined yet. But will be the same for everyone.
GA Easy as a website will be going away.
Requests for Proposal for GA Summit Presentations:
GA Summit Presentations – 9/21 – 9/23 Deadline to request to present is 5/13/2005.
Banner 7 Update:
BANNER VERSION 7
- Internal installations - early summer
- Fall – look at summit and in small groups
Georgia Tech is a beta site for version 7.
Summer 2006 production release.
International Studies
International Programs presented by Rick Sutton, Director of International Programs and Senior Advisor for Academic Affairs
Rick discussed 4 areas:
- Study Abroad Program
- Student Exchange Programs
- International Students
- On-line and Collaborative Curricula
Approximately 440 USG students go abroad. It is anticipated that by 2007 the number will increase.
100 or more go on exchange programs.
100+ students in certificate programs
80-100 students per semester in on-line language courses.
BOR advocates international education for all students. They also advocate collaboration among campuses to share scarce resources.
Currently we have 3 types of programs that students are using to study abroad.
- The program is a USG program taught using USG courses
- The program is a USG program, courses are taught by host institution
- The program is NON-USG
Students are encouraged to go abroad in legitimate program.
Issues surrounding these programs:
- Cross-registration of courses
- Credit transfer
- Financial aid from home campus
- How are fees paid at home campus
- Funds transfer between institutions
BOR issue how do they pay money for studies abroad. The BOR is looking at when it doesn't flow through Bursar function.
Exchange Programs – System membership in ISEP (International Student Exchange Program). Every school can send students. Only 8 schools currently approved to receive students.
BOR is encouraging more students to travel.
One Tuition + 2 Student (one outgoing – one incoming). Outbound USG student needs financial aid.
International Students – many different categories (F, J, M Visa). Different rules for different types. Homeland security concerns, SEVIS issues, employment and taxation issues.
F, J, M Visa – must be full time.
* Restrictions on the number of on-line courses. No more than 1 online to meet full time requirement. If you have enough hours to be full time without on-line courses then there would be no limit.
Integration of Banner and SEVIS
Health Insurance – Ideally billed through USG Institution
Waivers of non-resident tuition differential
New problem with SSN's
Waivers for non-resident for up to 2% of enrollment.
Does not have to be complete waiver, can be partial.
New issues with SSN – establish bank account can sometimes be issue for international students.
On-Line and Collaborative Curricula
- Certificates (European Union Studies, Latin American Studies, Canadian Studies, African Studies).
- On-Line foreign language courses (Japanese, Chinese and Russian)
- Some parallels to eCore, Web MBA, etc.
Issues – maintaining full time registration at home, cross listing courses in catalog
- transient registration
- maintaining/adjusting financial aid
- transferring tuition dollars between institutions
Student should not have to pay for additional cost of taking on-line courses @ higher cost.
The broken promise of MIF – would have had standardized procedures across institutions. Would have automated handling of many issues. The vision was a student centered seamless transient enrollment process.
Best Practices – Identify institution(s) that have implemented the most effective least cumbersome method of resolving issues.
Workshops – Host regional training sessions that analyze technical challenges and share best practices.
BOR Office of International Education 404-651-2950 www.usg.edu/oie/
Multi Institutional Functionality MIF
Presented by Tonya Lam
Delivered to OIIT 2 weeks ago.
Version issues – no delivery date at this point in time
They have learned that everyone must be on the same version.
Working through issues with SCT. SCT has other clients across country that would like to see this available. 7.2 or 7.3 version – opportunity to volunteer if you want to participate.
Academic Data Mart
Presented by Lori Jarrard
Phase I – workshops offered at end of March, great information that identified some issues. If you are having issues submit them to the help desk. She encourages everyone to go to a workshop.
Discussed fee waivers and financial aid. This is where they are headed. Currently they do not have the resources. It will be another year.
SAT New Writing Score – Does require putting into system. Data warehouse will collect this summer.
Institutional Score and National score – Must have both in there.
Currently cannot collect this in the legacy system.
Academic Data Mart – Storage of data to collect reports. We are able to report across systems. Currently we can only look at our own data.
Fall 2005- submit to both, but rely on ADM. Will do a true validation.
Student System Consolidation
Presented by Tonya Lam and Rich Loftus
Project began 9/2004 with BOR vote. Goal is to get 25 institutions consolidated to a Banner environment similar to how PeopleSoft is hosted in Athens. This will help money and pool technical resources. It will help with security, redundancy, equipment and hardware.
Jim Wolfgang from Georgia College and State University – This of course will challenge functionality. They are currently defining how this will work.
They anticipate having 5 volunteers. 3 schools have already agreed ( Fort Valley, Gwinnett and Bainbridge). He indicated that a total of 6 are interested.
They are taking a tiered approach. First they will move 5 schools, then 5 more in the second round, possibly 10 in the third and if we get that far 5 more in the final round.
How will it work? They will be bringing it up in stages and from this they will learn and determine how to progress through the stages. The initial schools are somewhat plain vanilla with the Banner product.
The groups with a lot of “add-ons” to Banner will be last.
BOR – IT subgroup for technology brought up request that was approved last September.
MAKE SURE WE communicate our issues now so that we can we what is needed for our schools.
He indicated that they are not trying to make all of the schools vanilla with Banner. They expect to start this way and then grow the model to the most complicated level. This may allow some of the smaller institutions to offer things that are not currently offered.
2 Rumors – What if the server goes down? Answer – Would not happen.
They will have a backup plan in place.
Changes made – Slow process to get changed approved or implemented. So
institutions can benefit from functional changes.
When a mistake is made how does it get corrected. On list of challenges each institution will have its own database. How does DBA get to this information from campus?
You will still be able to have all of your own coding, but cannot change tables.
If baseline has been modified that can be a problem.
CONCERNS – Enhancements to Banner are breaking Banner.
OIIT will be support for functional – No changes.
Project Management Team – Need good team but what about budget they have asked for one but truly budget problem.
Regents make decision and if budget is needed then they must decide it can be funded.
Asking for volunteers from functional side of house to sit on committee for consolidated Banner.
Will the schools lose functionality? Promise was made – trying to keep that from happening. The goal is to maintain level of service but get there in a different manner. Currently BOR does not know what functionality is – so this will all need to be done. Baseline what can be used? They need a working group to help identify what other functionalities are there. Even if BOR approves budget it will take until February 2006 to bring first 5 live.
First item – Data will be collected from everyone who could potentially be involved.
How to Collect? Volunteer group will help decide. Consolidated effort from all campuses.
Campus will have conversations to make sure things are communicated.
Rich – “This is not a bad idea.”
BREAKOUT SESSION RACAR
Donja Tripp called to order the session at 2:45 p.m. The minutes from the November 18, 2004 meeting were approved.
Report from Nominations Committee:
Susan Crozier had a report from the nominations committee. The current Vice Chair, Debbie Powell has been nominated to be the new Chair. The current Treasurer, Lisa McCleary has been nominated for the Vice Chair position and Julian Veal has been nominated to be the new Secretary.
Donja asked for a motion to approve the nomination. The motion was approved.
Discussion began on what schools are doing in the all “F” situations. Some schools are canceling registration and returning funds. Georgia Tech indicated that they are reversing tuition and fees only if 100% of the tuition and fees were paid with financial aid.
A/R SOLE Receipting Update
Amanda indicated that the update was released on March 31, 2005. They schedule Group 1 to begin on April 12, 2005 and currently are accepting registrants for Group 2 that they hope to have by May 16, 2005.
Expect a memo from Bill Bowes concerning Banner SOLE Receipting. This should not be implemented until July 1, 2005 or after.
Amanda discussed schools need to keep non-student receivables separate from student receivables. Non-student receivables are not term driven. Amanda strongly discourages schools from combining student and non-student receivables.
A/R Write-Offs
Institutions need to review Chapter 10 of the BOR Business Procedures Manual concerning write-offs. Schools continue to be confused about how to do the physical journal entries required to write-off accounts.
The meeting was adjourned
Minutes submitted by Lisa McCleary, Secretary
« RACAR