Office of Postsecondary Education - U.S. Department of Education

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations66837WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES2institution would have to obtain foreach of these exclusions.(2) Removing the requirement in§ 668.8(g)(1)(iii) that a student must beemployed, or have been employed, for13 weeks and allowing students to findemployment within 6 months from thelast graduation date in the award year.(3) Replacing the employercertification, income tax form, andSocial Security provisions in§ 668.8(g)(3) with other ways that aninstitution would verify that a studentobtained gainful employment.Several commenters suggested usingthe methodology developed by anational accrediting agency because theproposed method in § 668.8(g) does nottake into consideration circumstancesthat would prevent graduates fromseeking employment, such as healthissues, military deployment orcontinuing education, or practical issuesrelated to the employment ofinternational or foreign students.Several commenters stated it wouldbe difficult, if not impossible, for theseinstitutions to obtain the data needed tocalculate placement rates. Some of thesecommenters supported the use of Statesponsoredworkforce data systems, butcautioned that many communitycolleges would not be able to obtainsufficiently detailed placementinformation through data matches withthese systems to satisfy the proposedrequirements. Other commenters notedthat some States do not have workforcedata systems, so institutions in thoseStates would have to use the nonpreferred placement rate methodologyunder § 668.8(g). Many of thecommenters believed the requirement todocument employment on a case-bycasebasis under § 668.8(g)(2) would beoverly burdensome and labor intensive.Others opined that the placementprovisions are counterproductive,claiming that a substantial number ofcommunity colleges eschewedparticipating in programs under theWorkforce Investment Act because ofplacement rate requirements. On theother hand, another commentersupported the placement rate provisionsand recommended that all institutionsin a State participate in a workforce datasystem, if the State has one. Thecommenter asked the Department toclarify how the data obtained from aworkforce data system would be used tomeet the placement rate requirementsand the timeline for reporting thoserates. In addition, the commentersuggested revising the placement rateprovisions in § 668.8(g) to more closelyalign those provisions with practicesused by State data systems.One commenter stated that in order toreceive Federal funding under the CarlD. Perkins Career and TechnicalEducation Act, a program must receiveState approval that entails a review ofdocumentation requiring that theprogram be high demand, high wage orin an emerging field. As part of the Statereview, the institution providesdocumentation of potential placement.The commenter recommended that theDepartment waive the gainfulemployment provisions for allcertificate programs approved by theState under this review process.A commenter supported disclosingplacement rate data, but noted that theinstitution would only be able to reporton graduates who are employed in theState or continued their education. Theinstitution would not be able to provideoccupationally specific placement data,or data about graduates who findemployment outside the State, becausethe State’s labor data base only tracks (1)the type of business a graduate isemployed by, not the occupation of thegraduate, and (2) graduates who areemployed in the State.Several other commenters supportedthe proposed placement ratedisclosures, but believed that theprovisions in § 668.8(g) wereinadequate. The commenters madeseveral suggestions, including:(1) Expanding the category of studentswho complete a program (currently in§ 668.8(g)(1)(i)) to include students whoare eligible for a degree or certificate.The commenters stated they are awareof institutions that delay providing thedegree or certificate to students, whichomits these students from the placementrate calculation.(2) Specifying that the time standardsin § 668.8(g) (employment within 180days of completing a program andemployment for 13 weeks) also apply torates calculated from State workforcedata systems.(3) Specifying that employment mustbe paid. The commenters stated they areaware of institutions that have countedstudents in unpaid internships as beingemployed.(4) To be counted in the placementrate, providing that a student must findemployment in one of the SOC codesidentified for the program unless thestudent finds a job that pays more thanany of the identified SOC codes. Thecommenters believed that someinstitutions stretch the concept of a‘‘related’’ comparable job as currentlyprovided in § 668.8(g)(1)(ii). Forexample, an institution might includeany job at a hospital, including thelowest paying jobs, when the studentwas trained for a skilled job such as anVerDate Mar2010 14:10 Oct 28, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\29OCR2.SGM 29OCR2x-ray technician. The higher earningsrecommendation would condition asuccessful placement but allow aninstitution to count a student employedin an unrelated SOC.(5) To address the situation where astudent cannot qualify for employmentuntil he or she passes a licensing orcertification examination, providing thatthe 180-day period during which thestudent would otherwise have to findemployment should start after theresults of the examination are available.(6) To be counted in the placementrate, specifying that a student mustwork for at least 32 hours per week. Thecommenters stated that they are awareof institutions that include as successfulplacements any student that works atany time during a week, even if it isonly for a few hours per week.(7) Specifying that institutions mustuse a State data system if it is availableto ensure accurate reporting.(8) If the institution chooses todemonstrate placement rates by salary,providing that documentation mustinclude signed copies of tax returns,W–4s or paystubs to document earnings.(9) To more thoroughly substantiateplacement rates, requiring the auditorwho performs the institution’scompliance audit under § 668.23 todirectly contact former students andemployers whose statements wereobtained by the institution.Discussion: We are persuaded by thecomments that using the methodologyin § 668.8(g) may not be the mostappropriate method for determining theplacement rate for the majority of theprograms that are subject to the gainfulemployment provisions. Moreover, inview of the varied suggestions for howthe rate should be calculated,documented, and verified, in early 2011we will begin the process for developingthe method to calculate placement ratesfor institutions through the NationalCenter for Education Statistics (NCES).These final regulations establish somereporting requirements using existingplacement data as explained below,with a transition in a later period forinstitutions to disclose placement ratesobtained from the NCES methodology.NCES will develop a placement ratemethodology and the processesnecessary for determining anddocumenting student employment andreporting placement data to theDepartment using the IntegratedPostsecondary Education Data System(IPEDS).NCES employs a collaborative processthat affords the public significantopportunities to participate in making,and commenting on, potential changesto IPEDS. Potential changes are