VISITING COMMITTEE REPORT

of

University of Santa Barbara

5266 Hollister Avenue, Building A-17

Santa Barbara , CA 93111-3033

School Code #4200091

Visit Conducted on December 11 and 12, 2000

For

The Bureau for Private Postsecondary and 

Vocational Education

Visiting Committee:

Marcia Trott, bureau Liaison

Laureen Cahill, J.D., Committee member

Dr. Yueyun Chen, Committee Member

Dr. Philip Nash, Committee Member


 
 

Master of Science in International business - O

Master on Business Administration/Executive track - 1

Doctor of Philosophy in Business Administration - 5

Master of Arts in Education - 3

Doctor of Education - 8

Doctor of Philosophy in Education - 32
 

Section 2: Institution Mission, Purpose, and Objectives. This section of the report assesses the institution's consistency in establishing and maintaining governance and administration relative to its mission, purpose, and objectives. Included in this assessment is how the administration provides policy direction to top administrators and how the latter relates to it's faculty. 
 

How Reviewed: The mission, purpose, and objective statements as presented in the application and catalog were reviewed and discussed with administrators, faculty, and students. Curricula materials, the catalog, and other materials were examined to determine if the statements are consistent with actual practice.
 

General Finding are as follows: The mission of the institution is to "provide opportunities for quality-level studies in the fields of Education and Business Administration for students who are adult professionals." The purpose of the institution is fo function as a community of scholars wherein adult professionals can pursue their academic interest through dialogue with faculty and students and foster creative thinking that identifies problems within the business or education environments. The Visiting Committee found that the majority of all educational services are the responsibility of one person. This individual, Dr. Richard Irizary, has a Doctor of Philosophy in Education from USM, and yet it was found that he is also the faculty member who has evaluated the vast majority of student work product for the business program. The members of the facalty that are listed in the institution's catalog are not utilized, nor do their files substantiate their qualification to instruct, especially at the doctorate level. There are no records of when lessons are sent, received or evaluated. Students are admitted into graduate programs without documentation that they will have a reasonable prospect of obtaining their degrees. Students are extended credit for coursework completed at the undergraduate and graduate level outside the field of study.
 

Compliance: The Visiting Committee had concluded that the institution is not in compliance with CCR §71705, as USB did not provide sufficient documentation that its mission, purpose, and objectives are adequately reflected in every element of the school's operations. As this section is directly related to all other sections of this report, please review each section and provide a response. The institution's responses to those sections, with regard to the minimum requirements of California statute and regulation, will determine whether the institution has met compliance to this section.
 

Section 3: Governance and Administration. This section fo the report assesses the governance and administration of the institution, including the ways in which top level administrators and the governing board provide direction, and the relationships established between administration and faculty. 
 

How reviewed: The Visiting Committee reviewed the application, corporate by-laws, minutes of management meetings, promotional materials, and personnel documents, and interviewed top level administrators.
 

Administration: The personnel files for top-level administrators were reviewed. There was no evidents that employees are evaluated. The files were found to be incomplete and devoid of any reference checks or other documentation verifying previous employment. It is not clearly evident that any of the administrators spend any amount of time governing the institution. This is substantiated by the IRS form 990 (Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax) Part V, which depicts the list of officers, directors, trustee and key employees and the average hours per week devoted to their position.
 

Chief Executive Officer/Chief Operating Officer: Dr Grant Newton holds the positions of Chief Executive Officer and Comptroller.
 

Chief Academic Officer: Dr. Richard Irizary hold the position of CAO as well as that of Dean for the Graduate School of Education. Dr. Irizary's file did not include a resume or curriculum vita.
 

Compliance:
 

The institution is not in compliance with CEC §94900(a) (1), as the administrators do not have the appropriate documentation in their files that substantiate their qualifications. Without this documentation the Visiting Committee can only assume that the institution is not in compliance with CCR §71730(f), which requires that the institution employ administrative personnel who have the expertise to implement activities to achieve the institution's mission, purposes, and objectives and the operation of the educational programs.
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71725(b), which requires that each director take all reasonable steps within his or her capacity to cause the institution to complly with all applicable law and to correct the effects of noncompliance.
 
 
 

Section 4: Ethical Principles, Practices, and Advertising. This section of the report assesses the role of the governing board and the primary administrative officers, and the policies for information dissemiation, scademic freedom, and student rights. Examples of advertising were also reviewed to ensure ethical practices.
 

How reviewed: The Visiting Committee reviewed the application, catalog, advertising, student files, and administrative files. Administrators were interviewed.
 

According to Dr. Irizary, administrators meed and discuss policy development when the need arises. Any changes or additions to policy are communicated verbally to faculty, and students receive a mass mailing.
 

Academic Freedom Policy: The institution's Academic Freedom, as stated in the reapproval application, is as follows:
 

"Academic freedom is practiced at University of Santa Barbara in order to promote, not any individual teacher's interest of the interest of the institution, but to preserve the common good. Academic freedom in teaching is fundamental for the protection of rights of the teacher in teaching and the student in freedom to learn.
 

1. Teachers are entitled to full freedom in research and in publication of results, subject to adequate performance of their other academic duties; but research for monetary return should be based upon an understanding with authorities of the institution.

2. Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing subject matter, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to the subject.

3. Instructors bring three social roles to their work; they are citizens, members of all learned profession, and employees of University of Santa Barbara. When instructors speak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline. As instructors and employees, they should remember that the public may judge their profession and University of Santa Barbara by their utterances. Therefore, instructors should at all times be accurate, exercise appropriate restraint, show respect for the opinions of others, and make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the University. 
4. Students also shall have academic freedom to address topics to be learned without bias or constraint. Students should remember that they have freedom to express freely their views on subject matters in the classroom. However, rules of common courtesy and the rights of all students to expose their views should be respected as classroom discussions touch on topices about which there is a division of opinion."
 

Advertisement: Presently, the majority of the students have heard about the institution from past graduates. The institution is not actively marketing its educational services. The institution provided the Visiting Committee with ad copy and promotional materials published to date. Advertising consists of one ad in the Yellow Pages in the Santa Barbara phone book. The ad copy states that the insitution is "A center for Mid-Career Studies" and does not indicate that the delivery of education is via correspondence. A phone number is listed but a location address is not.
 

The promotional materials are brochures for each program of study. The brochures consist of an application for admission, application procedures and criteria, the requirements for each program and degree level, tuition and fees, and a brief description of the delivery of instruction and the duration of each program. The Educational Delivery System, offered by USB in its promotional literature, includes intensive seminars-in-residence as well as distance-study. The location printed on the brochure is 4050 Calle Real in Santa Barbara.
 

Recommendation: Documentation that the faculty has received the institution's Academic freedom policy should be consistently found throughout all faculty files. It is further recommended that the institution revisit its Academic freedom policy, specifically the clause "in the classroom."
 

Recommendation: The institution should consider updating its brochures to reflect the actual address of the administrative office, and eliminate the information relating to the intensive seminars.
 

Compliance: The institution is not in compliance with CEC §94831(g), which requires that advertisement must state that instruction is offered by correspondence.
 

Section 5: Curriculum and instruction for Degree, Diploma and Certificate Programs. This section of the report assesses the curriculum offered by the institution to ensure that students achieve the educational objectives of the program in which they are enrolled. 
 

How Reviewed: The Visiting Committee reviewed available course outlines, curriculum materials, and learning resources, and interviewed faculty, administrators and students.
 

Findings for each program are as follows:
 

Business Administration:The general objective of the master's level programs in Business Administration, according to the catalog, is to enable students to become a master practitioner in a specific area of emphasis (referred to a Module B). Students are required to complete nine to twelve units in an area of emphasis, in addition to a core requirement of nine units (referred to as Module A). To meet the 30 units required to complete a master's degree, a student must complete a thesis for six units (Module D) and the remainder is considered electives (Module C). Course numbers for the master's level degree programs are distinctly designated lower than those that depict the doctoral level courses.
 

The general objectives for the doctoral program are to prepare students to function at the highest level of critical and analytical thought, problem identification and resolution, procedural evaluation, and research in business. Students are required to complete a core of twenty -one of sixty courses (Module A) and a dissertation for twenty-four units (Module C). The remaining fifteen required units are courses selected from an area of emphasis: Finance, Marketing, Human Resources and Organizational Behavior, International Business, and independent Study (Module B). The doctorate program, according to the catalog, is built upon a master's level degree in Economics, Business Administration, or other relevant disciplines. The purpose of the doctorate is to prepare students for careers in research and/or teaching in academic and business settings.
 

A review of the program and curriculum requirements as well as student transcripts, illustrates that some students who enrolled in the Ph.D. program were allowed to transfer in 30 units from their master's degree leaving only 30 more units necessary to complete the program. One student was allowed to transfer 30 units from his conferred Master degree in anthropology. It was further found that one member of the faculty, Dr. Irizary, has evaluated and reviewed nearly all student work products for the business programs. His earned doctorate is in Education, and not Business or any other related field. It was also found that the topics of some completed dissertations fo the Ph.D. students did not match their degree.
 

Education: According to the catalog, the master's degree programs in Education are designed to enable a student to become a master practitioner in an area of emphasis building upon the basic entry-level of teachers, administrators, and counselors. Of the thirty units required, nine to twelve units are required for an emphasis (Module B) and six are required as the core (Module A). Nine units are required for the thesis (Module D) and the remainder are selected as elective (Module C). There is no variance inthe sourse numbering between the master's degree level courses and those that comprise the doctorate level.
 

USB offers two doctorate level programs which are identical in graduation requirements, with the exception that the Doctor of Education requires three years of active school experience, while the Ph.D. is designed to prepare the student for an academic or professional career in education by requiring additional research courses. A student in the doctorate program must complete nine units of the core courses (Module A) and twenty-one units in an emphasis, which include Adult Education, Curriculum and supervision, Educational Counseling, School Administration, Special Education, and Teaching Methods (Module B). Twenty-four units are required for the dissertation (Module D) and the remainder of the required sixty units are to be taken as electives (Module C).
 

The syllabus for each course offering is consistent in the template approach, but is was noted that many of them needed to be updated, particularly the bibliographies of works to be studied for a give course. It appeared that most courses were being proctored by the CAO as evidenced by the many courses, theses, and dissertations reviewed during the visit.
 

Compliance:
 

The institution is no in compliance with CEC §94900(a), which requires that the institution have a faculty that possess degrees or credential appropriate to the degree program and level they teach and have demonstrated professional achievement in the major field of study. Further, the institution is not in compliance with CEC §94900(a)(6), which requires that the institution provide adequate student advisement services, adademic planning, and curriculum development activities, as well as research supervision for students enrolled in Ph.D programs.
 

Section 6: Admission Standards. This section of the report assesses the admission standards of the institution in order to determine if the institution has set appropriate admission standards, if the students are properly prepared educationally for admission, and if their qualifications have been verified.
 

How Reviewed: The Visiting Committee reviewed the institution's admission standards presented in the application for approval and the catalog. In addition, randomly selected student records were reviewed.
 

General Finding are as follows:
 

According to the catalog, the admission requirements for each program requires an application , official transcripts showing the student has at least a bachelor degree with a grade point average of 3.0 or higher (for the master's level programs), two letters of recommendation, and a statement of Academic Intent. Doctoral degree applicants must have an earned master's degree or the equivalent with a concentration in a curricular area with a grade point average of 3.0 or higher.
 

The Visiting Committee found that applicants were admitted into doctorate level degree programs with question able course work accepted by USB in transfer. For example Robert Ollslagers, who is inrolled in the Ph.D. in Business Administration, has an earned bachelor and master degree in Cultural Anthropology. USB accepted 30 units in transfer or course work entitled Folk a Peasant Society, Individual Reading in Cultural Anthropology (for which there was no evidence what these readings wre).Advanced Research in Medical Anthropology,Grad Phonology Practicum, and Latin American Political Systems, to name a few. There is no indication which courses were graduate or undergraduate level courses or how any of these courses related to the field of Business Administration.
 

Sharon Didier received a letter congratulating her on her acceptance into the Ph.D. in Business Administration program, but the degree awarded to her was a Ph.D. in Education. Her dissertation was entitled Substance Abuse: An Analysis of Smoking Among Youth in the United States During the 1900s, The Impact on Adolescent Learning, and Implications for Society. It was also noted that the lis of graduates and students provided by USB for the Visiting Committee also established that Ms. Didier was enrolled in the Ph.D. in Business Administration degree program. She also received credit in transfer for course work seemingly unrelated to the fields of study (Business or Education), such as three units of credit for Cancer Early Detection.
 

Carol Georges, enrolled in the Ph.D. in Education Program, received credit from USB for coursework entitled Quality Control in Homeopathic Medicine, Imagery for Health, Anatomy and Physiology, Computerized Homeopathy, Research in Homeopathy, Botanical Herbal Medicine, and Clinical Training, to name a few. There was no evidence in the student's file indication how the institution determined any equivalencies to coursework offered by USB or to the field of education.
 

The Visiting Committee found that most student files do not contain letters of recommendation or evidence of the Statement of Academic Intent in violation of the school's own admissions policy. Dr. Irizary agreed that it is the policy of USB, as stated in the catalog, that a student be required to submit two letters of recommendation and a letter of intent. Failure to do so is a basis for a rejection of the applicant's petitition for admittance. Dean Irizary admits, however, that no students have been denied admission to USB.
 

Transfer credit toward advanced degrees may be accepted following analysis and student matriculation according to the catalog. Such credit will reduce the number of credits required to complete the student's degree program. Courses considered for transfer are selected on the basis of work that parallels USB required or elective courses. The institution's policy states that any transfer credit granted will become part of the student's permanent transcript. A maximum of six semester units for a thirty-unit master's degree and nine units for a forty-five-unit master's degree, specifically the M.B.A. program. Thirty semester units of credit may be transferred at the doctoral level. The Visiting Committee found that not all student files possessed official transcripts. For example, the files for Pamela Branch and JoDuthie did not have official transcripts substantiating their completion of a least a Bachelor's degree.
 

According to the catalog, international students "should be able to converse and understand spoken and written English equivalent to a proficiency reflected by a score of 625" on a Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). The Visiting Committee found no evidence in the student files of TOEFL documentation or any other method for determining English proficiency. This information was substantiated in reviewing the student files for Bismark Estrade and Toyoaki Mukai. The files lacked any evidence that international students, whose first language may not be English, had provided documentation that conclusively illustrated their ability to successfully benefit from instruction taught in English. Mr. Mukai, a student in the Ph.D. in Education program, appears to have used an interpreter to complete his coursework in the Master of Arts in Education in 1986.
 

Page 3 of the catalog, under English Language Proficiency, states, "Tuition will not be refunded to students who fail to comprehend written and spoken English." Page 9 of the catalog states "Lack of adequate comprehension of written and spoke English does not constitute grounds for a refund of tuition." This is a punitive policy, as it is the responsibility of the institution to require the appropriate documentation during the admissions process to establish that a student has a reasonable prospect of completing the program. Accepting tuition from someone who does not have a reasonable prospect is a violation of the Act.
 

Compliance:
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71850(b)(1), and CCR §71850(b)(2), which requires that units earned at institutions are approve by the Bureau, Public or private institution of higher learning accredited by an accrediting association recognized by the United States Department of Education, or any foreign institutions.
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71770(a), as it does not adhere to ist stated admission standards and admits students who are unqualified into its educational programs. The institution shall establish specific written standards for student admissions for each educational program. These standards shall determine, to a reasonable degree, that the applicant will successfully complete the program requirements.
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71920(b)(5)(E), which requires that credit be based on any examination of academic ability or educational achievement used for college admission (i.e. official transcripts).
 

The instituion is not in compliance with CCR §71865, which requires the possession fo a Bachelor's degree or its equivalent for admission into post-baccalaureate degree programs.
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71745, which requires that an institution ensure that all students admitted to its educational programs have a reasonable opportunity to complete the programs and obtain their degrees.
 

Section 7: Scholastic Regulations and Graduation Requirements. This section of the report assesses scholastic regulations relating to grading, attendance, and dismissal as well as the requirements for graduation.
 

How reviewed: The Visiting Committee reviewed the scholastic regulations and graduation requirements described in the catalog and the application, examined student files and interviewed students and staff.
 

According to the catalog, the institution uses a system of letter grades for distance-learning courses. Theses and dissertations are given an "S" upon completion. Credit is not given foe coursework rated below "C" and the range of possible grades are from "A+" to "C." Incomplete coursework is designated as "I" and unsatisfactory coursework is "U." There are no provisions in the institution's catalog for passing coursework or "P." Student transcripts for Carol Georges and Bismark Estrada indicate coursework grades as "P."
 

In reviewing the course products submitted by Mr. Estrada, who is currently incarcerated, it does not appear that the products are his own. Dr. Irizary acknowledged that the only library resources the student has access to are those USB sends him through the publisher. Dr. Irizary admits that there has been no coordination made with the prison education staff to review his documents. A term paper submitted by Mr. Estrada is thirty pages in length with no footnotes or references. To date he has completed all coursework but has not received a diploma because he still owes the institution money.
 

There does appear that there is some review or evaluation of each course paper, although it is evident that only one member of the faculty is actually involved in the institution. For example:
 

Student Name Program # of Courses Evaluated & Faculty Evaluator
 

W. Pendergrass M.Ed 8 All Dr. Irizary

F. Lynch Ph.D. Ed 9 All Dr. Irizary

J. Banks Ed.D. 6 All Dr. Irizary

T. Mukai Ph.D. Ed 14 All Dr. Irizary

S. Powers Ph.D. Ed 5 All Dr. Irizary

C. Georges Ph.D. Ed 6 All Dr. Irizary

P. Branch Ph.D. Ed 4 All Dr. Irizary

J. Elledge Ed.D 7 All Dr. Irizary

J. Duthie Ph.D. Ed 15 All Dr. Irizary

N. Chen Ph.D. Bus 5 All Dr. Irizary

R. Olislagers Ph.D. Bus 1 All Dr. Irizary
 

The Date Assignment Received is the same date that the course grade was received. According to Dr. Irizary, most assignments are sent directly to his home. There is no record, according to Dr. Irizary, of when the work product was actually evaluated or when the student was notified of his or her grade.

Compliance:
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71775, as there is insufficient evidence that the institution maintains and implements procedures designed to measure student academic progress. In particularly, the documentation of student progress shall be readily understandable by other accredited or approved institutions for the purpose of evaluation of records for admission, and the award of grades or credits shall be bsed on evaluation conducted by duly qualified faculty.
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71720(g), which requires that the institution offering instruction by correspondence shall employ a sufficient number of faculty to assure that each lesson is mailed and evaluated in a subscribed time-frame. The institution shall maintain a record of the dates on which lessons are mailed and received.
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71830(b), which requires that the institution maild the first lesson and the initial correspondence material to the student within seven days after the student has bee accepted for admission.
 

Section : Faculty Qualifications. This section assesses detailed information on the faculty and their qualifications, and their ability to effectively interact with students, particularly in the development of curriculum and student evaluations. In addition, the size of the faculty and whether or not it is sufficient to meet the needs of the student population is addressed in this section.
 

How Reviewed: The application, catalog, and faculty files were reviewed. In addition, administrators were interviewed.
 

General Findings are as follows
 

The current Dean for the Graduate School of Business Administration is Dr. Richard Wilder. The Dean for the Graduated School of Education is Dr. Irizary. Of the student records reviewed, it was noted that Dr. Irizary conducted nearly all evaluations of student work products for both the education programs and the business programs. A very small portion of the student files showed evidence that Dr. Wilder evaluated student work product. This is also evidenced in the review of September 2000 accounts payable, which shows that there was no faculty reimbursement for anyone other than Dr. Irizary. The highest degree level conferred upon Dr. Irizary is a Doctor of Philosophy in Education from USB in 1986. There was no evidence in the Business programs Dr. Wilder's faculty file did not include evidence of his doctorate degree in the form of transcripts, although he also graduated from USB.
 

Of the faculty files reviewed, none included evaluations. The files for Joseph Mensah, Walter Michalsi, Ralph Nair, James Quina, Donald Grote, Robert Hawkins, Frances Johnson, Laura Wilde did not include any evidence of post secondary transcripts. Marie Variey, Margaret Thomas, Rolan Birdwell and Richard Irizary have transcripts from USB. It was noted that the transcript on file for Sr. Margatet Thomas illustrates that she was admitted to the institution on September 23, 1988. She was admitted with a bachelor degree in business administration and received Doctor of Education degree in July 1991. Her transcripts depicts only three letter grades but completed a total of 21 courses. The file of Laura Winters included a copy of a transcript, which illustrated her conferred doctorate from Drew University in English Literature. All faculty files, with the exception of Laura Wilde's, included curriculum vitas. All files included a new contract effective February 15, 1999 through February 15, 2001, with the exception of Frances Johnson.
 

There was no formal evidence of faculty involvement in curricular design or evaluation or any structure in place to assure of facilitate this involvement on an ongoing basis. Further, the last student surveys were done in 1996, when a residential session was held at Francisco Torres, a facility on the campus of the University of California, Santa Barbara. There was no evidence of current student surveys.
 

Compliance Issues:
 

The institution is not in compliance with CEC §94829(b)(3), CR §71000(k), and CCR §71720(j), which require records to be maintained that substantiates faculty qualification to instruct.
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71720(a)(b)(e), which requires that the institution employ duly qualified faculty in sufficient numbers with sufficient expertise, and who shall possess a diverse educational background. 
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71685(c), which requires that all of the faculty participating in doctoral committees have three or more years of field or research experience related to their degrees, and after they have obtained their degrees. Further, all faculty shall have been active in their fields of scholarship or profession within the five year period preceding participation on the committee. In addition, a minimum of 50% of the faculty shall have degrees conferred by an institution accredited by an accrediting association recognized by the United States Department of Education of the American Bar Association. 
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71885(e), which requires a proctor, selected and approved by the doctoral committee, to observe the student at a distant location and verify, under penalty of perjury, the identity of the student. Further, the proctor shall verify that the student did not receive prompting during the evaluation process.
 

Section 9: Educational Records. This section of the report assesses the institutional policies and procedures for the maintenance of educational records. The application and catalog were also reviewed in assessing this section. 
 

How Reviewed: the process for the maintenance of student records was reviewed with administrators, and student records were reviewed.
 

General Findings are as follows:
 

Student records were organized and neat. Records are stored without loss of information or legibility. The institution hd personnel present at all times during the visit to access records at the request of the Bureau. The Visiting Committee found that the required Transferability of Units Disclosure is not given to students before enrollment and some students did not have signed enrollment agreements in their files (Pameal Branch, Frantz Celestin, and Josephine Banks). Other required documentation that was not included in student files has been discussed in detail throughout this report.
 

Compliance Issues:
 

The statement concerning the "Transferability of Units and Degrees Earned at Our School" must be disclosed in its entirety, pursuant to CEC §94816(b). This statement should be signed and dated by both the student and the institution and evidenced in the student file. The institution, in anticipation of this issue, responded in a letter dated December 15, 2000 that this disclosure does apply to their educational services, as they are not vocationally-oriented, and the programs do not lead to employment. Considering that the admissions practices of the institution allows applicants into graduate level programs without completed coursework remotely similar to the fields of study offered by USB, it is difficult to understand how the program could not prepare students for a particular career field. As such, this area remains an issue, and the institution is required to provide evidence that it is in compliance.
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71800 which mandates that no institution shall offer any educational program, or receive any consideration from any person for an educational program, except pursuant to a written enrollment agreement that contains all of the information prescribed by the Act.
 

Section 10: Tuition and Fees schedule and Refund Policy. This section of the report assesses policies and practices of the institution in regard to information students are entitled to receive regarding the cost of their programs, and the provisions by which they make financial arrangements.
 

How reviewed: the refund policies contained in the application and catalog were reviewed, as were theenrollment agreement and several randomly selected student files.
 

General Findings are as follows:
 

The institution's Refund Policy states, "the student has a right to a full refund of all charges less the amount of the nonrefundable application Fee and Matriculation Fee and the amount for course materials not returned in resalable condition, to be determined by the school, if he/she cancels this agreement befor midnight of the eight business day after the first course was assigned or mailed.: According to Dr. Irizary, refund checks have never been issued. As records indicate that the institution does not track when assignments (lessons) are sent to the students, it is doubtful that refunds could be calculated correctly.
 

The Visiting Committee found that the financial records of student enrolled at USB lack sufficient detail or follow through on the part of the administration. For instance, the only entry in the ledger for Josephine Banks states, "Charges to be determined in consultation with Dr. Irizary." Dr. Irizary indicated that he does not know anything about the financial practices, but was glad that this student's file came up as there appears to be a"a disconnect between the academic functions and the charging/financial practices."
 

Daniel Jaeger enrolled in the Master of Science in business administration in March 1999. There was no evidence of any academic related activity since July 1999 yet he has been charged for every course that he is required to complete. Scholarship money from YMCA was credited to his account in the amount of $2500 in December 1999. In December Mr. Jaeger was billed for the service fee for "additional time" for a six month service fee ($1980 equaling $330.00 per month). Dr. Newton responds that he needed to bill the student before the end of the year because his scholarship ran out at the end of the year. The student was not aware of this charge when a member of the Visiting Committee interviewed him by telephone, but believed that he has a "credit" on file, and that he will not be charged any more money. School officials said they had no communication with the student and suggested tat if a member of the Visiting Ccommittee were to call him, that "maybe he would hurry up and finish his degree." The catalog gives a range of dates for completion from 1 to 2 years. Advertising materials for the Master degree state that the program duration on one to tow years. The school appears to be out of compliance with its own policy )catalog0 concerning program duration, and is charging student for the "service fee for additional time" prior to a 3-year duration There was no evidence that Mr. Jaeger was placed on probation due to the delay of course completion. The student seemed to like the school and stated that he just received a catalog in the mail about two weeks ago. He stated that he had not received a catalog before then. The Visiting Committee found, however, that Mr. Jaeger had signed the enrollment agreement, which stated that he read and understood the catalog.
 

The Visiting Committee found no evidence of what a student receives in services in exchange for -the $330 monthly service fee for additional time. The enrollment agreement states, "Should the student require additional time for completion of this program, the fee for additional service will be at the rate of $330 per month." This open-ended and does not state the total financial obligation required by students to pay for their programs. As written, students could be charged this service fee indefinitely until they complete course work and dissertation. When asked what students receive if they have requested all lessons after paying all tuition, Dr. Irizary responded, "No one has ever asked for all materials. No one has ever paid for the entire program. They are usually in arrears."
 

The enrollment agreement lists all fees that the student is obligated to pay, but the total amount is not stated on the same pave as the student's signature. Although the agreement asks for the information regarding loans the student may have outstanding for tuition purposes, the agreement does not have the required Student Tuition Recovery Fund information concerning California residency.
 

Compliance:
 

The enrollment agreement does not have a clear statement for students, who are not residents of California, that they are not eligible for protection under and recovery from the Student Tuition Recovery Fund, pursuant to CEC §94810(a)(10)
 

The enrollment agreement does not have the student's signature on the same page the total amount the student is obligated to pay for the course of instruction, pursuant to CEC §94810(a)(2).
 

Section 11: Physical Facilities and Library Resources. This section of the report assesses the appropriateness of the physical facilities in creating a learning environment that assists students in successfully accomplishing their educational objectives.
 

How Reviewed: Information submitted in support of the application for approval was reviewed in concert with materials available for documentation on-site (including a brief tour of the facilities).
 

General Findings are as follows:
 

Physical Facilities: The facilities are appropriate for instruction offered through the distance learning modality. The lease of the office was recently extended through October 31, 2001.
 

Library Resources: The USB library does not function as a regular university research library. Students are, however responsible for making arrangements with local or regional institutions for conducting the necessary research work with which they may engage in their studies. According to Dr. Irizary, the institution requires each applicant to complete a Documentation of Library and Computer Resources form. This form asks students to certify and document the resources available to them, including evidence that the student has authorization to use the library and computer facilities by an individual responsible for those uses. Of the current student files selected for review, most did not contain evidence of a "library use authorization form." Further, it appears that students who do have access to library resources at all can still enroll (i.e. Bismark Estrade).
 

Nearly all student files reviewed had a copied statement, signed only by dr. Irizary, that states, "To Whom It May Concern: The student for whom the present Academic file exists has assured the USB Administration that he/she has access to dissertations and other reference materials at an institution of higher learning within reasonable distance from his/her home. In most instances, the institution is a public supported school of higher learning." All copies of this document are dated November 20, 2000.
 

Compliance Issues:
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71740 as the library resources are insufficient and do not support the educational programs. The library is woefully deficient in regards to original research expected for a Ph.D. level program, and there is insufficient evidence that students are required to use the library resources as part of the curricula.
 

Section 12: Student Activities, Services and Financial Aid. This section assesses the educational services that supplement and support educational programs and the basic needs of the student population. This assessment includes the facilities and resources available to students that address student advising, job placement assistance, housing and financial aid.
 

How Reviewed: Information presented in the application was compared with documentation of the operation on-site (i.e. student records). Interviews were held with students, administrators and faculty to augment the findings.
 

General Findings are a follows:
 

The catalog is organized and legible. The catalog does not provide a statement that it does not award credit for prior experiential learning and does not establish the institution's timelines for sending or receiving lessons and coursework.
 

USB does not offer state of federal financial aid or any other type of financial assistance. Dr. Irizary can be contacted via the internet and appears to be the individual responsible for the majority of any direct contact with students. The institution will be required to update its catalog in conjunction with its responses to those relevant compliance issues cited in this report.
 

Compliance:
 

The institution is not in compliance with CCR §71810(b)917), which requires the institution to state the approximate number of days that will lapse between the institution's receipt of student lessons, projects, or dissertations and the institution's mailing of its response or evaluation.
 

The institution is no in compliance with CCR §71810(b)(9), which requires a statement regarding the award of credit for prior experiential learning. 
 

Section 13: Financial Statements and Records. This section of the report assesses financial standards of the institution and if the mandated financial responsibilities have been met and are in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
 

Review: Information submitted on fiscals stability has been referred to another Unit within the Bureau. If any further information or clarification is required, they will contact the institution directly.
 

End of Report