December Meeting Minutes

Professional Affairs Committee

  • Welcome and Introductions

Present: DC, WS, CH, JB, DG, JC, TI, JS

Present for part of the meeting: JB (John Bernhards) KF (Kevin Folsom) MA (Mike Anthony), RD (Rich Davis) from Evergreen College

Absent: None

  • Housekeeping Items

--PAC and ARC contact information and terms

--Discussion over a standing date/time for future monthly conference calls

CH updated both PAC and ARC contact forms. PAC conference calls have been scheduled and are included on the 2011 Awards Program Timeline document.

  • New Sustainability Award Criteria (PAC)

--Review and finalize criteria

PAC drafted an updated version of award criteria and DC presented updated criteria to Executive Committee on 12/4/10. Final draft to be presented at February Board meeting.

  • Health Care Accreditation (Brooks Baker/Kevin Folsom & John B)

--Joint meeting discussion with CATF over accreditation program feasibility study

Kevin Folsom (KF) presented idea for CATF Accreditation program. CATF asking PAC to determine if program has potential and how it relates to APPA. What are the benefits of accreditation and how does it fit in with APPA? Accreditation is in alignment with FMEP, AFE, and FPI APPA programs. PAC to consider how much risk should be taken with code standards/accreditation recommendations. KF mentioned that accreditation program examples exist for animals but not humans. Used AAA/AC as a template for possible program. Possibility is to set up a separate board to set up/manage accreditation program and fees. WS thought it would be a good idea if we checked to see if someone was already offering a facilities accreditation program so that CATF doesn’t have to reinvent the wheel. Don’t use non-facilities people to design the program. KF – Schools in remote areas don’t have fire inspections. This is important to have because hazards exist that currently aren’t being adequately addressed. DC – Is CATF looking at health care? JB (John Bernhards) – No, CATF will use it as a template for facilities accreditation if it makes sense. WS – CATF runs the risk of setting this up too narrowly. Should develop core facilities piece within an existing accreditation program. Sell the facilities accreditation piece to existing accrediting organizations. If we market program to an agency and not the researchers, the funds will be easier to get. Accreditation dollars are easier to get when governance/oversight issues are brought up by the agencies. MA (Mike Anthony) –Risk management aspect needs to be considered. Should work to reduce risk and be mindful of institution legal/risk implications. Once accreditation program is in place, sell the program by stating that the program will reduce risk at institutions. WS – Is this different than any other accreditation program? Other agencies are always trying to manage risk.

TI - Saving money, reducing exposure should be the goal. What is the intent? It’s a constant balance to manage risk. JB – It’s very difficult to find money to take care of all defects. If we don’t have more resources, we will have trouble creating more requirements for accreditation and the getting the accreditation. DC – One option is to go with an existing accreditation program. BB (Brooks Baker) wanted to use facility members to go to other campuses and do peer evaluations like the FMEP’s. DC wants to use existing programs like PAC did for the new sustainability award. This would minimize risk/cost for starting up new program. JB – We need a recommendation for a feasibility study to take to Board for approval. Include SME’s, risk managers, and others to bounce ideas off of. Needs to be called feasibility sub-committee. We’re not talking about a lot of money to set this up. We need 1-2 meetings/calls. It might take 15 – 18K to study this further and make a recommendation to the Board and then decide full costs to move forward. It could take 1-2 years to get program up and running and would not cost anywhere near the start up costs for APPA’s Credentialing program. WS – An institution that is accredited minimizes risk and ultimately saves the institution money. DC – How do we know that this model isn’t already being done by someone in facilities? JB – This will be the first charge for the feasibility study. To determine who else may be doing this sort of program for facilities. Need to determine if there are other organizations that would like to partner with APPA for a fee on this. DC – Need to finalize costs in order to move forward with a vote. JB – PAC need to just recommend feasibility study. Possibly proceed with sub-committee and develop BPR before getting approval by Board in February. TI – I’ll forward the motion. DC – Motion on floor. JS seconds the motion. APPROVED BY THE PAC:

RECOMMENDATION: That APPA establish a study group or task force under the purview of the Professional Affairs Committee which would evaluate the feasibility of establishing an APPA institutionally-based accreditation program. The recommendation is contingent upon the committee’s review and approval of a budget proposal request (BPR) to be presented to the committee by CATF chair Kevin Folsom and Professional Affairs Vice President David Cain.

  • Pacesetter Award Review (ERAPPA request)

--Review current award criteria

DC –Protocol is for WS to take any decisions on this from PAC back to ERAPPA. Don’t use names. WS – Understanding is that award is for people who contributed to local chapter/regional level on their way up to the international APPA level. Criteria didn’t match awards given out for people who already were at international level. DC – ERAPPA felt that criteria was vague. JC – Award is for service to chapter, region, or international level. Encompasses all levels and people need to be sure to give a complete account of their accomplishments. WS – Recommend adding chapter/region or national to the second bullet point on APPA web site for award criteria. TI – This is an APPA award (meaning international), it’s not a regional award. JB – Motion to add international where bullet states, “…and other functions of the international Association”. TI – This issue should go to Joe Rubertone. He’s the regional rep and should be contacted first. WS – Does someone really need to have international experience? JC – Assumed this award was a local/regional award and not international. Meritorious is for people working at the international level. TI – This is an APPA award. People should not get this award unless they are doing something at the international level of APPA. WS – If intent of award is international award then filtering out Anne (nominee behind complaint) was correct thing to do. What is the intent? How would we evaluate someone with no local/regional experience but served on a task force? TI – They would not be nominated. WS – Will take current Pacesetter criteria and reevaluate it and make recommendation to PAC on revised criteria. Will work to make intent more understandable. JB – Rescind previous motion? WS – Let’s alter existing motion to clarify intent of award. We’ll come back in February with output. Motion approved. DC – PAC should review award criteria every year.

  • Awards

WS – Recommended that new PAC members should do two site visits for AFE Award before mentoring others.

--Back of the House - electronic submissions (Christina Hills)

PAC/ARC orientation conference call scheduled for January 27 from 3:30-4:00 ET

--Critical Path Method (timeline/schedule) for Awards - January – May – CH to revise and email document out to PAC for review.

  • Certification Update EFP/CEFP

--Update on program and numbers.

CH provided numbers for past prep course and exam offerings. Expressed concern about quality of prep course offering and stated that several concerns/items will be addressed at Credentialing Board meeting on December 11.

  • Discussion on Implementing President Darrel Meyer’s Plan of Action

--See below for specific topics and committee assignments. DC marked in blue the ideas or strategies that PAC provided for objectives assigned to PAC.

  • Old Business
  • New Business/Next Steps
  • Adjourn

Topics and Assignments for PAC Committee for theDiscussion on Implementing President Darrel Meyer’s Plan of Action

THEME:“INVESTING IN YOUR FUTURE”

Why important? APPA’s greatest resource is its diverse membership and their vast knowledge.

Critical Question:“How can we best serve the members’ needs so they can achieve their potential as education facilities professionals?”

Objectives:ASSESS– generational differences; needs of members; and relationship with regions/chapters

EXPAND – collective body of membership; differentiation in the marketplace; and number of programs and services

ENGAGE – everyone, in a myriad of ways, and at their time and place of choice

PROFESSIONAL AFFAIRS/ AWARDS & RECOGNITION COMMITTEES:

  • Determine ways to promote student internships at member institutions
  • Determine the barriers/issues within the institutional hiring process that precludes the hiring of young facilities professionals who have graduated with an accredited four-year degree in facilities management
  • Develop a plan for using emerging technology to offer more web-based on-line and electronic delivery methods for the credentialing program
  • What award and associated criteria should be developed to highlight our 100-year anniversary (e.g., institutional accomplishment, best practices, etc.)
  • Support a student research competition and establish an award for its recognition
  • Ascertain whether any new recognition programs would align with those of our international partners (e.g., new Sustainability award, etc.)

Strategy # 1: Engage young facilities professionals

Initiatives:* Expand availability of programs (PD)

  • Identify methods to recognize accomplishments (AR/PAC)
  • Sponsor young professional at the APPA meetings at no cost
  • Scholarships for young professional (increase this)
  • Invite young professional to the Credentialing, Institute and Leadership Academy at no cost
  • Sponsor young professional for Certification/Credentialing
  • Young professional = person under 5 years or < of F.M. educational enterprise experience in the profession
  • Young professional award that is nominated by Region (like the unsung hero award)
  • Investigate future awards that target young professionals for underrepresented communities (e.g. HBCU’s)

Strategy # 2:Promote alignment and create synergy among, across, and between International APPA, the regions, and the state/local chapters

Initiatives:* Develop new training and workshops for delivery at regional and state/local chapters

  • Utilize outcomes of the Task Force’ recommendations to drive programming, redefine membership (structure), and establish recognition opportunities (PD/M/PAC/AR/IR)
  • Develop a panel discussion at the annual meeting to kick off the Sustainability Award.
Strategy # 3:Recruit and retain several targeted institutional classifications such as Community Colleges, K-12 schools, HBCUs, and small liberal arts colleges
Initiatives:* Create a Community College Focus Group to better understand this group of facilities professionals and to further explore their needs (CCFG/M)
  • Support the needs of and recommendations made by the Community College Focus Group (M/PD/PAC/AR/IR)
  • Create new Sustainability Award that includes these categories’.

Strategy # 4:Utilize Thought Leaders Symposium (TLS) content for program development, new publications, and targeted research effort(s)

Initiatives:* Develop programming to enhance credibility and professional image of the senior facility officer (PD)

Strategy # 5:Evaluate content and delivery of existing programs to ensure they are affordable, accessible, and focused on current issues and needs and utilizing innovative delivery technologies

Initiatives:* Evaluate affordability of existing programs (PD)

Strategy # 6:Enhance strategic alliances and partnerships

Initiatives:*Identify new ways to leverage our existing alliances and partnerships (PD/M/PAC/IR)

  • Created an alliance with AASHE to develop the Sustainability Award.
  • Ongoing strategic alliance/partnership with AASHE
  • Business partner sponsorship for the Sustainability Award
  • Recognition of the longest business partner for the 2014 event

Strategy # 7:Execute delivery and dissemination of the certification credentials (EFP & CEFP)

Initiatives:* Review and determine best implementation methods to advertise and market the existing designations (CB/PD)

  • Select locations for delivery of the exam (institutions, state/local chapters, regions, etc.) (CB/PD)
  • Determine how and when to deliver the EFP exam on-line (CB/PD)
  • New – Develop a plan for using emerging technology to offer more web-based/online and electronic delivery methods (PAC/IR)
  • Devoting December certification meeting to explore the greater use of technology. Deliver prep course and exam on line

1