TCAF

Ontario Association of Career Colleges
Training Completion Assurance Fund Forum
December 10, 2001

"As was said" Session Report
613.592.9776
tony.nash@inter-connex.ca

The purpose of the forum is to consult with the private career college industry around the development and implementation of a Training Completion Assurance Fund.

Susan Williamson
Director, Ontario Association of Career Colleges
President, Business Skills Learning Centre

I am the owner and director of a small, independent and relatively new career college in Hamilton. I want to welcome you to today's meeting and thank everybody for attending. I also want to spend a few minutes talking about OACC.

A lot of planning and thought has gone into this meeting. We are here today as a group, to figure out as an industry, how to move forward on this important topic. The Training Completion Assurance Fund is an OACC initiative. However, that does not mean that OACC has already determined what the TCAF should look like. It hasn't. OACC hasn't decided what the direction should be, or how the fund should be run. It hasn't even decided if the fund should be established. What OACC has decided is that if a fund is to be established, it should represent the consensus of a broad base of our industry. Your participation today is critical to this process. Nothing has been decided yet and your input will be taken into account in any decisions that are made. I encourage those of you who are not yet members of OACC, to strongly consider joining OACC, our industry association. Those of you who are members, I encourage you to become more involved in OACC.

I want to take a moment to tell you about my story and my experience with OACC. Business Skills has been a private career college since 1998. We teach Microsoft Office, accounting and IT courses. Although before starting Business Skills I had a lot of business experience, I had no experience running a school. I thought that my MBA and my years of senior management experience at the Bank of Montreal would be very helpful in the transition, but I was wrong. Before I started Business Skills, I thought of buying an education franchise. I remember after the first few months of running my school with barely a customer, my mother asked me, "If you had bought a franchise, would they have supplied the customers?". She seemed to think that I could have ordered a busload of customers to arrive every Monday and Wednesday. Gee, I wish.

Life is not that simple and this industry is undergoing some tough and turbulent times. Since we opened in 1998 we have seen a lot of closures. Career Academy, Shaw College, Keyin College, Productivity Point, two Academy of Learning locations, the Toronto School of Business and Alexandria College have all closed. In case anybody is out there thinking Hamilton would be a great place to open a school, I have this to say - keep out. J

The problem with being a small school is that information is very hard to come by. Being part of OACC has given me information. I have e-mailed or called OACC many times with questions and I have always found a willingness to answer my questions and to help me.

I used to think that OACC was dominated by large schools and existed just to meet the needs of the large schools, but this is not the case. I was very surprised to find that over fifty percent of schools represented by OACC are small schools. I am a director on the Board of Directors of OACC. This is my first year on the board and I was amazed to find that over half of the Board of Directors are representatives from small or mid-sized schools. There is a real sense that this association represents all of the industry, and that includes the larger schools as well as the smaller ones.

OACC can give your school practical advice, if that is what you need. It can give you a marketing advantage of a larger association, as well as linking to your website. If you have OSAP, OACC can process your OSAP applications and so about twenty-five percent faster. Perhaps most importantly, OACC represents the needs and concerns of our industry to the government. It lets government officials know that we do not want tuition capping. That we cannot afford to spend an increasing amount of time on audits and that we are willing to accept and be judged on key performance indicators but we want to have input into the process.

One pet peeve of mine is that we need to convince HRDC to only subsidize students who go to approved private vocational schools, approved private career colleges. Like many newer schools, we do not have OSAP. Most of our clients receive HRDC subsidies. I believe that students who attend non-regulated schools are at greater risk of school closures and receiving an inferior education. Now that I am a director on the board I brought this issue to the attention of the board. A committee has been formed now. We are looking at how we can deal with this topic. As a small school there is no way that a tiny school in Hamilton can have an impact on HRDC. I encourage you if you have issues on your mind to participate. I also encourage you to participate in today's session. There should be a flyer about the benefits of joining OACC. If you are interested in joining OACC talk to me, talk to anyone. I would be happy to talk to you.

We have a lot to gain from working together. A lot more to gain than just being individual schools who look at each other as competition. That famous quote, "united we stand, united we fall" is very relevant to this industry.

Kevin Costante
Deputy Minister, Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities

It is indeed a pleasure to welcome you here today and to give opening remarks at an event of such significance for the future of the private career college industry in Ontario.

This is, I believe, the first time in which so many representatives from private career colleges have gathered to deliberate and formulate advice to government on an innovative way to enhance consumer protection provisions within the industry.

The development of a training completion Assurance fund is an important initiative that has the potential to enhance student protection; but, also as important, to enhance public confidence in the private career college industry. Your work is both timely and necessary.

The Ministry has been directed to revise the bonding levels under the Private Vocational Schools Act to ensure the same degree of protection as is provided to students at private degree-granting institutions.

The Postsecondary Quality Assessment Board, which will be assessing and making recommendations on applications to establish private degree-granting institutions in Ontario, has released a draft Handbook for applicants that sets out proposals for program and institutional standards, including student protection standards.

The benchmark that is being proposed is that the institutions must demonstrate that they have sufficient financial resources to guarantee a refund of tuition and fees paid for courses that students start but to not have the opportunity to complete.

In practical terms, the standard that is being considered is for the private career granting institutions to post bonds equal to the highest amount of unearned revenues for a twelve month period, subject to a minimum that would be as much as two hundred and fifty thousand dollars
per location.

The proposal you will be considering today has been developed by the OACC committee. The Ministry has worked with the committee on the basic framework for student protection. Essentially, however, the details on how the Assurance fund will work must come from the industry. You will be participating in the fund and financing it. The idea has to be yours and supported by the industry. You have the opportunity to shape this initiative, to make it work for you and for your students, and for the good of the private career college industry as a whole.

Once the proposal has been fully developed and submitted to the Ministry, we will assess the effectiveness of its student protection measures. We anticipate that we will then be able to request amendments to the PVS Act, to reflect a new bonding regime - reduced bonding levels for participants in the fund and likely increased bonding levels for institutions that choose not to participate.

You will have a full agenda ahead of you. The proposal that you are being asked to consider today is but a starting point for your deliberations. You are being asked to consider a wide range of issues, including: the purpose and use of the fund; how the fund will be governed and administered; the financial implications of participating in the fund, including bonding implications; and public communication about the fund and what it means to the students and the industry.

So, I will let you get on with the busy day ahead. I wish you best in your deliberations. Have an informative, productive day.

In closing I would like to reiterate the importance and significance of this event. It will be, I hope, just the first in a series of events in which the industry will have the opportunity to consider the measures that are needed to enhance the image of private career colleges and to ensure their quality and reliability for students.

Finally, I would like to thank the Ontario Association of Career Colleges for organizing this event and encouraging this remarkable turn-out. In particular, I would like to thank Frank Gerencser, chair of the TCAF committee, for his hard work and commitment to this initiative.

Good morning everyone. I have been asked to say something about the history of the trainout fund. It does have a long history. I want to step back a second and talk about OACC and its predecessor, Private Career Education Counsel. The industry that you are in, is one that although dominated by a few supposedly, dominated by a few very large players, it is not defined by those large players, it is defined by every single one of you in your own local communities. City after city and town after town and where your schools are located. You define the reputation and the meaning of the private school sector in your community. The question I used to get all the time - But is it accredited? What is the education worth? What does it mean? I fought hard and long for the industry to realize that the school in North Bay, in Carleton Place, really finds it difficult to stand on its own in the sense that its graduates have to move on and people might not have heard of them. The more that your organization can involve itself in comprehensive, quality directed initiatives, the more that the local school and the small school is able to benefit. For a hundred years this industry recognized this by having centralized curriculum and examinations run out of Paul's office in Brantford. So even if you came from a very small school people didn't have to wonder or worry about your school as people knew you were part of a larger system. It is you when you come together in your collectivity that recognizes what needs to be done, the quality with which it needs to be done.

The trainout fund concept - it is not a government issue. It was not something invented by the bureaucrats. This issue is one that came directly out of this industry. I can remember sitting in this building, and we were talking about bonding, and one of your members stood up and said isn't it about time we put together a trainout fund? The concept arose from lets all get together collectively and have a fund in place that will allow us to move in, in emergency circumstances, to protect that student. The industry worked long and hard to produce recommendations on a series of issues. One of the key issues was a trainout fund. It was the industry that was the instigator of this. Unfortunately, the government didn't see the wisdom of the entire package. Student Protection Fund, some people in the industry have seen the need for this for a very long time. When Kevin Costante became deputy, they brought the idea up again.

We have been unbelievably lucky in the last little while in making sure that closures have had as minimal an effect on students as possible - we can't continue to role the dice.

Shortly after me you will be hearing from the TICO board, the Travel Industry Council.

It is only going to succeed, this kind of material, this kind of initiative, will only succeed insofar as you participate. And you participate wholeheartedly. The issue is probably not one that at this stage of the game is to be fought. It is an issue that is more likely going to be there in some form, let's make it the most productive form for our business.

I leave it to you and trust you that you will find ways, unique and novel ways, to put a fund in place that protects you, consumers, general public of Ontario and enhanced the whole industry. I leave you with a thought, many of you used to dread getting phone calls from me, it was either a student complaint or a closure - you knew and know viscerally how the closures effect your industry negatively. Don't go to Hamilton because a lot of schools have closed down and it looks like fertile territory. Don't go there as it is tough to get somebody into a private school in Hamilton because of all the closures being on the front page.

This is the biggest step you will take to ensure that nobody who signs a contract with your school has to worry about whether they will get their education finished. I am sure you will be able to do it, and do it with integrity and good business sense.

What I will try to do is give you an overview of the travel industry - how we protect consumers in Ontario and give you some background as to what we do.

This is a different model. It is not perfect. But it does provide for a level of protection for consumers and industry participants as far as disclosure is concerned, as far as standards are concerned.

The Travel Industry Act was put into force in 1974, originally administered by the Ontario government right up to 1997 when it was pushed down to the private sector to manage it. Part of the Act itself was to put in place a compensation fund to provide reimbursement to consumers as a result of insolvency or bankruptcy of either a travel retailer or wholesaler. The purpose and scope of the act is to protect consumers, provide full disclosure to consumers, provide for a level of standards within the industry. There are financial standards that are provided. We have an inspection program that enforces those requirements. The fund is administered now by the council. There are limits on our fund, limits on payments out up to $3,500 per person and up to $5,000,000 per event.

In terms of how we reached self-management, TICO's role as an administrative authority since receiving delegation in June 1997, we have a board of directors composed of industry members. TICO's goals as an administrative authority is to provide protection to consumers so they feel safe when they travel.

The results of self-management - in the fiscal years from 1990, that our claims were significantly high. If you look at 1990 we had claims over three million. We have managed to keep down the claims to a very low level right up to this year. We have done that by introducing much higher standards, and inspection program.

The revenue stream has remained relatively constant through early nineties then it started to grow.

We are restricted in what we can do to failures that are outside of our responsibility. Canada 3000 airlines and the after-effects on consumers and the travel industry compensation. The model proves that, in this scenario it will be a bit of a long wait for consumers to get their money.
TICO's long-term goals - plan, we have 2,500 travel agencies in this province. Our long-term goal is to try to get standards across the country. There are only three provinces that have similar funds - Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec. The other provinces are not protected. There are consumer protection acts that will protect consumers to some level. We would like one common fund for everybody in Canada. We would like to move towards self-regulation - that is probably a long time down the road. We only recently moved to self-management.

I will be giving you a proposed overview of the proposed training completion Assurance fund. This whole presentation, and the day, is about raising the bar on student protection. We will no longer be referring to ourselves as private vocational schools, we will be changing the name to private career colleges - which is far more in line with where we think we are. It will be changed in legislation at the next available opportunity.

We are a large industry. Altogether we train over thirty thousand students a year. We also have revenues over four hundred million per year, as an industry. Despite the size, we are made up of mostly small colleges, with two thirds having annual tuitions of less than five hundred thousand dollars.

We are diverse in size. The smallest career colleges represent sixty-six percent of the industry, yet only twelve percent of total tuition of the industry. We cover the entire spectrum of careers (IT, business, healthcare, hair care, aesthetics, welding, truck driving, culinary) and students include career starters as well as career changers.

I would like to be able to put forward some logo together as an industry. At present, there is no logo.

Why are we here today? It is all about consumer protection. Ontario's Private Vocational Schools Act is consumer protection legislation. Among other things, it protects students when schools fail. And schools do fail. In some cases, owners sell their businesses to others, some head offices close franchises, in others simply close the doors - these are the clean cases.

Unfortunately, business is not always neat and tidy. Sometimes a note is on the door and the school is closed. Unfortunately, bad news is news. This leads to students, public and politicians feeling that students aren't protected. That's what people see when it happens. As much as bad news sells, good news doesn't. so when trainouts do occur, nobody knows about it. of the over five thousand students effected by close outs in the last four years, over ninety-nine percent have completed their training. However, nobody knows this. That is one of the issues.

We want to be able to make sure that when we put together the guts of what is a fund, we do not want to do anything that dissuades people from spending funds on this, as well.

We, as an industry, we have been responsible. But, from the government's perspective, what if we don't come together? The bonding system is the only thing the government has in place to protect students. One thing it does is form a third-party credit check. It also does encourage small schools to close cleanly. However, it is a two-year wait for claims and can settle out on what is involved. Furthermore, if the number of claims are larger than the size of the bond, the claims end up being pro-rated, such as twenty cents on the dollar.

We have a risk - if we don't put something to increase the protection that is there for students, the government will such as in the case of private degree granting universities.

The government is looking to increase the bonds for us if there are not TCAFs or something similar to put together. In some cases, higher collateral is becoming necessary to get a bond, tying up a lot of cash.

The good news is that the government is committed to reducing bonds if we put in a trainout fund of some sort. Today is the big day for us, as an industry, where we can put the rules together.

Back in June, the OACC unanimously approved the creation of a trainout fund. Today's meeting is about discussing the key components of the TCAF:

Over the past several years, there have been an unprecedented number of schools closed. Essentially all students have completed their training, typically classes resuming after two weeks. Despite our success, the government is unsatisfied. Some options of the fund would be to

What are the processes we should follow?
What situations should be covered?
What are the rules?
How should TCAF help?
What things should be covered?
What is the role of government? What kinds of regulations need to be put in place?
How to identify students?
Start date? First annual general meeting at the end of May?

There is a lot of committee work to be finalized, and a lot of work with the government.

What will it cost? What will it do for me? How will this work?
Should we even have a bond? In some jurisdictions they have eliminated bonding altogether, yet their trainout funds can essentially act as bond companies. My personal belief is that bonds do work, albeit to a limited degree. My recommendation is to keep a minimal bond. Others disagree and want a TCAF to replace the bond system.

How large should our TCAF be? The size and the rate would need to depend on for what the fund is used. Coming out of what the purpose is will be the size. With the fund being controlled by the private career colleges, and not the government, we feel that we would be able to administer it more effectively than the bureaucrats.

The next question would be how long you would keep paying into the fund.
The majority of people, we are looking to be able to minimize the fees but still get capable administration - such as the cost of a part-time executive director, office space, general expenses based on a volunteer board for approximately fifty to one hundred thousand dollars per year.

The last component is marketing - an investment in marketing will pay for itself in increased consumer confidence and therefore increased consumers.

My recommendation is that on the range from a tenth of a percent (in the U.S.) to a full percent of tuition (in the Maritimes) is towards the smaller end. The recommended TCAF rates are tiered up in the same way the bonding is tiered. The marketing premium is at half of the administrative premium. This would raise about a hundred and sixty thousand dollars per year. Your cost would depend on your size.

We see TCAF as a non-profit organization with an unpaid nine member volunteer board, consisting of four directors from OACC member schools, two from non-OACC schools and one financial, one legal and one student/graduate. The college must be in good standing with the fund.

Start by saying that our group, we were very positive about this initiative, or certainly supportive of it. we hope these remarks will be helpful to the positive outcome of today. To start with, we felt that the purpose was:
     · Completion of training
     · Distance ourselves from the poor publicity we have been getting from these closures
     · Improve the credibility with the government and public
     · Use as a marketing tool
     · Protect the students of risk of these closures
     · We would like to recommend replacing the bond entirely with this initiative

The situations that would be covered by this initiative - we felt that all situations of closure and displacement should be covered. We did feel, however, that the government, through the Ministry representative should be involved in something that was felt to be a ministry closure if the government has put so much pressure on the school or otherwise and the school felt no other option but to close as a result.

In the case of a closure, we felt:
     · A TCAF board member should deliver an information session with the students of that school
     · That letting students know that this is a problem, the board could have a mechanism in place,
     · That the owner should be encouraged to inform the board,
     · That the board could have a sign posted on the school so the students arriving could be directed to a 1-800 number.
       and going forward to try to accommodate those needs
     · That TCAF could place an ad in the paper notifying the public of the progress of the train-out and to contact students
     · Schools should maintain an offsite list of students, accessible to TCAF

As to how the resources should be used, we felt:
     · That it may be necessary to do some offsite meeting arrangements with the school closing, the board member would make arrangements     with displaced students to meet close by
     · Try to get as much information from students as possible
     · The school doing the trainout would bill the fund for the remaining tuition
     · The students that refused the trainout would not receive a refund
     · Students would be reimbursed only where a trainout was not practical, to be decided by the board member
     · Take an ad out, we are trying to be proactive in terms of what we are doing

Are there any closures that would not be covered?
     · We felt the presence, mostly, if the government made this happen then there should be some sort of explanation as to how this was
       brought to bear
     · The Ministry should be involved in closures due to Ministry pressure

Process to identify the students in need of the trainout:
     · The student contract, we felt it may be difficult if the school closes, the files are locked up and the landlord has a key - the students      are encouraged to go to the meeting, if they were paying themselves we would have no way other than what they indicated as to where they   were in there training.
     · An assessment would be done to facilitate matching the trainout
     · The board would decide how much training is required for the trainout
     · The franchise closure would be trained out by a sister franchise
     · Perhaps a tender model to nearby schools would be offered for trainout
     · The board would in a general way analyze the situation and make it as compatible for the student as possible.

There are a couple of overlaps - we felt the Ministry should have some involvement, although disagreement as to how that would take place. We would like some input as they seem to be holding a lot of the cards.

First of all I will say our group didn't get into quite as much detail. We ended up with more questions than answers.
     · First and foremost, is to protect the students.
     · The second is the stability and credibility of the PCCs
     · Protect ourselves from additional government demands. It is seen as a positive way to move forward with demonstrating that we do need something there to protect ourselves, the students and the government.
     · Reduce and/or eliminate the bond. There was consensus on this. There might have been a few variations on it. There was some thought that a small bond to go along with it might not be a bad idea. Some felt that once the fund met its maturity, perhaps in five years, the need for the bond would be eliminated.
     · A more effective vehicle than the bond to protect the students - the bond is not that effective for students, the process is quite onerous. It is a process that says we can get the students trained, it maintains the good will and the reputation of the private career colleges
     · Consensus that the fund is a last resort. Who determines what a last resort is? This fund is used after all other avenues have been exhausted or negotiated
     · CRI - we weren't quite sure what that was.
      like? Is it a percentage? How does it all happen? We talked about the purpose in broad strokes, but exactly what does that mean.
     · Incentive for the private career colleges to join TCAF. That needs to be supported by the government. Why would people join a TCAF? What would the advantage be? TCAF makes lots of sense if bonds are going to be greatly increased.
     · Who is going to be covered? Everybody? If everybody is, what is the purpose of joining it unless bond prices are different.
     · There have to be specific criteria for what it is used for. If it is broad based the fund won't last.

This is our needs work column
     · There was a suggestion from the group that monthly tuition payments would reduce unearned revenue therefore exposure and reduce size of fund needed
     · This limited closured for financial reasons - this was another one we felt really needed a bit of work. It may be as a result of the government for what ever reason saying you are going to close, typically it is still a financial reason. How it happened could be up to date, but it is usually a financial reason. What does it mean to limit for financial reasons?
     · Should there be a restriction for the amount taken out for any one incident? There are schools that would take a huge amount if anything happened. How do you balance that?
     · And the question of all schools regardless of membership in the fund. Is it only going to happen to those schools that are members? If you are not a member we won't help you - what would that do to the industry standard and reputation?

These are things we definitely need more information on:
     · One of the questions was the impact of opening the act? Who will define what happens in that process?
     · What is the government role? How is it determined? Do they sit at the table on the board? The government might not want a role, but they ultimately have responsibility in this area so have to figure out what their role is.
     · Legal defense fund - if a closure happens because they were on the restriction list for eight months and couldn't handle it anymore and had to close, and felt that had somebody intervened on their behalf the whole closure might have been avoided, is this a reasonable thing for this fund to do? Should this fund deal with things before they happen?
     · The role and the power of the executive director of TCAF. Is it administration? Is it brokering? Need some clarity around that.
     · Who determines the destination of the trainout dollars? Who makes the final decision about what school gets the trainout? Who will be the ultimate body that decides how that will happen?
     · Who determines when, being the TCAF, is the last resort? Where does the first call for help come in? Who determines when TCAF is the right group to approach?

It appears that we had similar issues. We had two aspects to our group. Before we took our break we dealt with concerns.

Final comments - the group that we had was a very good group. Everybody spoke, everybody had comments and concerns. We all came together and I was pleased to see how they came together with common interests.

We looked at what the level of the fund should be. We felt that there should be a cap, no matter what, but it should be based on a purpose. The more people that can access the fund the higher the cap should be.

Need professional input, people who are risk professionals who decide what risks are.

The cap, itself, should be proportional to the highest risk. We are suggesting that it should be leveraged. You might want to cover 25% of the highest risk, then look at secondary Assurance to cover the other part of the risk, if, indeed, that one school goes down. We shouldn't try to fund the very worst contingency.

# 2 - In terms of the ramp up of the fund, we were looking at a five-year plan and using either secondary Assurance or government backup to make sure this risk is minimized.

# 3 - In part three, who should pay for the fees? We were unanimous that it should be the institution.

# 4 - The question in terms of should there be unlimited hits on the fund, the group felt that the protection of TCAF was paramount. If it was bankrupt it would not serve all the students. We believe that all students should be protected equally. Initially limits should be considered. It is very important, the hits, limiting the hits by purpose.

# 5 - In terms of the bonds, 50% of the group wanted the bonds eliminated as they didn't work at all, the other 50% thought they should be reduced. No matter what, it was felt that they should be tied to the ramp up of the TCAF.

# 6 - The group was unanimous that there should not be separate fees and it should be a percentage of revenue.

# 7 - The consensus of the group was that fees should be prepaid annually, essentially to minimize administrative fees

# 8 - In terms of trust funds, the group was unanimous that there should not be trust funds

# 10 - In terms of the government backstopping the fund, again it was unanimous that the government should provide a guarantee.

# 11 - We felt that the TCAF should be able to claim against the bond. If bonds are still in place and that we should explore what opportunities there are for that claim.

# 12 - We had quite a list of what we wanted to be required from the government. The first one was due process - the ability of the government to shut down schools without any guidelines or rules to operate with. We are looking at OSAP, PVS regulations, performance requirement - the government cannot do things arbitrarily, we need due process. As well, we want meaningful consultation about what goes into it all.
In terms of self regulation, one suggestion was to share TCAF administrative costs and to ask the government to eliminate the default cost sharing program, it will continue to push schools out of business.
We felt it is important to have the right for TCAF to access students' records of closed schools for purposes of trainouts. We would also like them to eliminate the OSAP tuition cap.

# 13 - The last question was the government role in TCAF. That basically was to backstop the TCAF process with a guarantee, have a loan start up. The government has the responsibility for government imposed closings. The government should take initiatives to keep schools open and operating, rather than slowly strangling you to death.

Our group was interesting in that we covered the spectrum - large, small, geographically, OACC members, not. I'll go through the areas that we agreed on.

In terms of governance:
     1. the board should set up a steering committee and establish committees, the obvious things like the board structure was pretty much agreed to in terms of the numbers although there was further discussion of it
     2. whether or not to do a trainout or refund
           a. buy liability Assurance
           b. members should be PVS registered and compliant
           c. the board should hire administration, conduct marketing and establish a budget
           d. establish committees
           e. bring an annual plan of the budget to the annual general meeting for approval
           f. they would decide on premium rates that would presumably be discussed at an annual meeting
           g. invest trust funds
           h. through hired staff conduct day to day activities
     3. as little government participation as possible
     4. some sort of government advisory role to ensure that they do have buy-in

in terms of institutional participants:
     1. We felt that only registered PCCs should be involved
     2. If somebody was to, or a corporation was to, tap the fund, could they come in again? Well, there was lively discussion about this. The majority felt that if they paid all the money back, sure. There was some feeling that if rates were increased they could come back in as well.
     3. all PVS registered diplomas
In terms of participants
     1. Students from non-participating schools would not be covered. If you don't have Assurance you don't have Assurance - it should be as simple as that
     2. Students in now would be grandfathered.
     3. all students should be covered whether they are paying themselves or a third-party is
     4. students would not have the right to opt-out
     5. only students registered in PVS diploma programs would have it available
     6. same would apply for international students

Areas for further thought/research/clarification
Governance - areas of agreement
     1. There should be a balance in the board
     2. The balance/mixture should be relative to the relative share of the industry
     3. Question of term length for board members - need more clarification
     4. It was interesting discussing who would be viable. We ended up basically saying if you past the Ministry's mark then you could join the fund - basically let the government do the screening. Hopefully the Ministry's guidelines will be there to filter out situations of someone starting up and immediately closing.
     5. there should be research on setting a cap on the fund
     6. payouts - fixing a maximum size to payouts.
     7. The business about coverage when an institution fails. It was interesting because it became quite clear that if somebody, if we go down the road, a school has been paying its dues for a number of years and don't pay there dues this year, what happens to those students? If we were to cut them off because they are a few days late, doesn't that conflict with the purpose? The students in most need are the ones going to the schools most likely to have financial difficulties.
Governance - areas of disagreement
     1. The value of inviting students to be a member of the board. Some felt that students could provide experience.
     2. The OACC members versus non-OACC members
     3. Just how to come up with the steering committee. It was felt that the group that had gotten us to this point were definitely an important gang to continue participation, but definitely others should step up to the plate if they are interested
     4. 50% support all students / 50% support diploma students only

How we saw the whole issue of marketing was one not just of the training completion fund, but it is a sectoral issue. Have to have a whole sectoral approach. We need to be positive. The other major issue, we appreciate who we communicate with, there are many publics with whom we need to communicate. There are different messages we give to them. We have some very specific audiences including the people who loan our students money, the people who loan us money, the people who hire our students, we want to build confidence.

    1. whole story
    2. sector approach
    3. tail wagging "the dog" - sector is the lead
    4. directed communications
    5. PCC positioning
    6. success

We talked a little bit about talking about a responsible industry doing a responsible thing rather than dealing with failures. There is a reference that talks about the seal of approval. We really think we need to brand this a little bit. We need to own the TCAF. The training fund is part of our good housekeeping seal of approval/quality seal of approval. We want to own that, make it a part of institutions. We want people to understand the concept of the seal. We really felt it was important to build brand equity in being able to build brand value in the seal of approval.

We talked about that we may need some directed communication with different audiences. We have to keep the government in the loop.

We need a logo to say this is who we are. We need to integrate some of that communication into our student handbooks, student contracts, other communication materials.

The other point that came across quite strongly, when we talked about explaining to people the training fund when it was in place, we have to explain some guidelines, exactly what that representation would be. We were concerned that we make sure that the training completion fund never becomes the issue. The message can never stray very far from substance.

We talked a little bit about informing, but not frightening people about this. We are concerned that if we represent, you will get your money back, you will get living expenses covered, the huge risks we create for the fund and for ourselves as to what will be covered.

Assurance versus Assurance. There are two different mind sets when it comes to that. Assurance is a last ditch protection when the bottom falls out. An assurance fund is a more proactive positioning of the board/agency that would administer this. There was not unanimity of opinion on this. On the one hand we don't want to be involved in covering everything. The extent to which the fund managers, do the fund managers have a preventive role to minimize the risk, to the fund, by being involved in at risk schools?

Loss prevention:
     1. risk prevention
     2. loss prevention
     3. saving a student saves ourselves
     4. intake quality control
     5. ongoing quality control

Are we a lifeguard or a mortician? Will we deal prevent problems or deal with them?

Ongoing public relations
     1. annual report
     2. cannot be separated from success
     3. solve problems early
     4. success
     5. government
     6. positioning

First failure:
     1. who owns/grabs the issue
     2. the first step
     3. fund the front end

We also talked about:
     1. whether there would be an initial limiting of payout.
     2. the trust fund
     4. is it necessary to be a member of OACC
     5. government onside

there is some experience with other organizations, including a plethora of American examples where the fund has worked - we may not be inventing the wheel, but we are modifying it.

What did you like about the session?	If we did this again, what should we do differently?
Smaller groups	Would have liked to have seen ten to fifteen minutes of open discussion before entering the focus groups
Liked being very focused	Some of the background was lacking
Good looking ladies : )	Perhaps you can provide the background paper prior to the meeting
The fact that it merely happened is wonderful
The facilitators kept us on track

Question #1 - What should be the purpose of the Training Completion Assurance Fund?
     a) completion of training
     b) damage control
           a. eliminate bad publicity
           b. improve credibility of industry
     c) marketing tool
     d) reassure public
     e) to protect students at schools with risk
     f) some schools have no risk
     g) more cost and no benefit for some schools
     h) to replace the bond
     j) top of page 4 of discussion paper - points 2, 4, and 5 - not 1 and 3

Question #2 - What sort of situations should the TCAF cover?
     a) school bankruptcy
     b) if OSAP pulled
     c) shouldn't cover government closures - will cause increased premiums
     d) government closures should involve shared costs with Ministry

Question #3 - What process should be used to assist students who are covered by the TCAF in case of closure?
    a) TCAF board member to deliver an information session at the school
    b) Ministry to immediately notify TCAF
    c) TCAF should have a 1-800 number
    d) Work with a compatible school for a trainout
    e) Concern - How will we get access to student information
    f) Ministry can provide information on OSAP students - not privately funded
    g) Board to be proactive - take out ad in newspaper to contact student
    h) TCAF board to put notice on door of school with information for displaced students
    i) TCAF board should have access to student records
    j) Schools should have an offsite list of students

Question #4 - How should the human and financial resources of the TCAF be used to assist students in the event of closure?
    a) May be necessary to arrange an offsite location for an information session. Get student information at that time. Explain options
    b) TCAF to be billed for remaining tuition by school doing trainout
    c) To keep premiums down perhaps there should be a limit on the amount paid out from the fund
    d) Students who refuse trainout should not get refunds
    e) Reimburse students where a trainout is not practical
    f) TCAF board would decide on the practicality of a refund
    g) TCAF board should take out ad to notify public that a trainout is in progress

Question #5 - For participating institutions, are there certain types of closures that should not be covered?
    a) Would the fund allow the Ministry to more readily close a school?
    b) If the fund covers any scenario - Ministry off the hook
    c) Should be ministry involvement
    d) All closures should be covered but Ministry should be involved in closures due to Ministry pressure

Question #6 - What processes need to be in place in order to identify the students in need of a train-out, their course of study, their start date, their end date, and their finances?
    a) Student contracts contain all information
    b) Supply the information to TCAF
    c) OSAP students, WSIB, HRDC students - information can be obtained re: dates but not necessarily payment information
    d) Students should provide proof of payment (receipts)
    e) Problem may exist in getting transcripts
    f) Is there an assessment done to facilitate matching a trainout school?
    g) Board should decide how much training is needed for a trainout
    h) Each student will have to be dealt with individually (disagreement)
     i) If a franchise school preferred trainout should be the same franchise
    j) Use a tender model to select trainout school
    l) Board needs to analyze situation for best option for trainout

Question #7 - Should the TCAF fund be used to assist students who are impacted by a school closure that results from a "shut down" by government?
a) Ministry needs to be involved
b) Students need to be covered to avoid bad publicity

Group: Purpose of the Fund
Facilitator: Susan Williamson
Scribe: Peggy Nichol

1) High Level Purpose
     · protect students
     · credibility of PCCs / stability direct link
     · protect ourselves from additional government demands
     · possibility of trust fund
     · monthly tuition payment would solve problem of exposure and reduce size of TCAF
     · to do away with bond when adequate funds or reduce bonding and made in favour of TCAF
     · more effective vehicle to protect students

Question 5 & 7) Closures Covered Students
     · all schools should be required to e members of TCAF
     · only programs of a certain value
     · all students and training should be covered
     · limited to closures for financial reasons
     · minimal emergency funds not sustainable if too comprehensive
     · restrict amount take out for any one incident

Question 8)
    · government should continue to act in brokering capacity
    · should it be executive director of TCAF?
    · Criteria must be defined under which decisions are made and government should not have right of veto
    · Speed of decisions is important in the event of a closure
    · Government should be on board
    · Active role to date, positive so far, mechanism should be put in place to carry on
    · Determine what government role should be

Side Issues
    · Opening the act??? Worries about what else
    · Due process with Ministry
    · Purpose
    · Legal defense fund is needed
    · Clarification from government - what is meant by committed to reducing bonding requirement?
    · From bonding company - what security they will need
    · What will be audit requirement with TCAF?

Group: Financial Aspects Including Bonding
Facilitator: Randy Atwater
Scribe: Lorna Mills

Initial Concerns:
     1) Do not have to be an OACC member school to participate
     2) What does it cost to do a trainout?
     3) Security deposits being called
     4) Who decides where students go? Students? TCAF? Ministry?

Preventive Measures
     1) How tuition is collected?
     2) Different levels of contribution for new and existing schools
     3) School initiated trust fund
     4) 40% of money up front and 60% in trust
     5) Has there been any movement on how OSAP funds are handed out?
    6) Have bonding companies had to pay out money?
    7) For previous school closures, how much money was from OSAP?
    8) Have we considered a "drop in" team for training out?
    9) Who sees a school's financial statements?
    10) Bonding should be done on a group rate, e.g., OACC members
    11) Will fund be used to pick up deficit of receiving school?
    12) Information disclosure surrounding shut down. What? When?
    13) Maybe the fund could be more definitive!
    14) If the receiving school takes any money from the fund they will not be allowed to continue as a school, i.e., curriculum, license, OSAP
    15) Allow OSAP transfers between existing schools
    16) Improved process for receiving schools to approach a defunct school's students
    17) Adequate and allows school to grow as per discussion paper
    18) Will TCAF be restricted to two years as bonding is now?
    19) Bonding is the purview of the government

    1) Base size of fund on largest P.C.C.
    2) Place a cap on fund
    3) Have an agreement with government to cover shortage in fund
    4) Generate 3x what the actual bonding companies have paid out over the last few years
    5) What happens if large school goes down and fund is not at that level to cover costs
    6) Students will pay for it one way or the other
    7) School should pay - consensus - have this premium be a portion of books and equipment
    8) Should be absolute per campus limit
    9) Can't Ministry set levels because they already have our financials
    10) If premium paid monthly there is an idea of what is coming
    11) This year's premium is based on last year's revenue
    12) Pay as you play - consensus
    13) Breakdown to a cost per student
    14) Reduce or eliminate bond when fund reaches a certain level
    15) Registration of students to the fund
          a. Will give industry stats
          b. Keep cost down if done by individual schools
    16) There should be more than one way to give a level of responsibility to owner
    17) Fund should not cover students when government closes school
    18) Fund should be for unforeseeable events
    19) Would the government be les cautious about calling notes if fund in place
    20) OACC has mechanism for collecting money ($25 per student)
    21) Send list of monthly starts to fund
    22) Can be member of fund and not OACC
    23) On-line registration generates a bill - sent to school, school pays, adjusts down if student doesn't start

What are you using to base fund on?
HRDC students should be eligible to access fund
Student is a student is a student - whether diploma or certificate

Group: Financial Aspects including Bonding
Facilitator: Randy Henry
Scribe: Carlos Carvalho

Question # 1 - How high should the fund be built?
    1.1 There should be a cap
    1.2 Should be large enough to cover the largest school
    1.3 Cover the largest school but for one year
    1.4 Fund should cover unearned revenue only
    1.5 Take what happened in the four years and what is the unearned revenue is to establish a cap
    1.6 Possibility of individual schools defining their own cap
    1.7 25% of the worst forecasted closure with secondary backing
    1.8 size of fund has to be related to purposes of fund
    1.9 first year 500k and get matching 500k from Assurance company
    1.10 take the question to an actuary to determine cap

Question # 2 - How quickly should the fund grow?
    2.1 very quickly for the protection of the students
    2.2 in the three years but show the plan to government of Ontario
    2.3 should look at a five year plan with back up Assurance
    2.4 keep insurable premiums at same rate as current bond rates until cap is reached
    2.5 should be built up in five years with government back-up

Question # 3 - Who should pay the TCAF premiums (students or institutions)?
    3.1 the institution
    3.2 should be a hidden cost to the students
    3.3 agree that the premiums should be paid by the institution but not necessarily pass on to the students

Question # 4 - Should there be a limit on the amount of payout from the fund in respect to any one closing, or any one student?
    4.1 should be dependant on the purpose
    4.2 should not be restricted in dollar amount. The student in a big school should not be treated differently than a small school
    4.3 student should be protected at all costs
    4.4 no restrictions on payout amount
    4.5 no, therefore should not be a limit
    4.6 there has to be a limit to the payout on tuition or the best bid that the board receive for the train out
    4.7 the maximum should be train-out costs as negotiated by the board
    4.8 limit should be on both student and event initially

Question # 5 - Should bonding requirements be eliminated or reduced as a result of the implementation of TCAF?
    5.1 Eliminate bonding - they don't work well - bonds do not play a part in stopping school closures
    5.2 Eliminate or reduced by amount of TCAF
    5.3 As part of five year plan reduce bond requirement to approximately year three then eliminate when fund gets going

Question # 6 - Should there be a student-based premium for the train-out fund and an institution-based fee for the handling of administration and overhead costs?
    6.1 no separate marketing on admin fee should be all together
    6.2 if you have a separate marketing and admin fee smaller schools will end up paying larger effective percentage
    6.3 NO

Question # 7 - How should TCAF premiums be collected (monthly, quarterly, or other)?
7.1 annually fee will reduce admin costs (prepaid based on previous year)
7.2 I think it should be collected more often due to the risk of school closures

Question # 8 - Should TCAF participants be required to use trust funds to manage unearned revenues? If so, how would this work?
    8.1 Yes
    8.2 No (16/16)
    8.3 No, but the fund should have rules on how tuition is collected
    8.4 Disagree on rules being put on the fund on how collect tuition fees
    8.5 No trust fund but the fee should be tighter for those schools that collect full tuition up front
    8.6 Premiums should partially be based on unearned revenue

Question # 9 - Should there be an initial levy to kick-start the fund?
    9.1 No, because the bonds are still in place
    9.2 Yes, but by government backstopping
    9.3 No

Question # 10 - Should government be asked to "backstop" the fund in case early claims exhaust the fund?
    10.1 Yes
    10.2 Yes
    10.3 No

Question # 11 - Should the TCAF fund be entitled to submit a claim against the bonds of train-out students?
    11.1 if there is an opportunity to put a claim against the bond, TCAF should subject to contract law
    11.2 TCAF should work some arrangement to determine who should do the train-out
    11.3 The Ontario government should ensure that TCAF has access to the bond
    11.4 Explore the opportunities as to whether TCAF would have access to the bond (schools)

Question # 12 - Are there other trade-offs other than bonding that the industry should negotiate for, in exchange for establishing a train-out fund?
    12.1 there should be due process with respect to OSAP administration and present regulation
    12.2 due process, given the school enough time to respond, to appeal, and how should OSAP deal with schools
    12.3 to have a meaningful consultation and input with industry to the design of the process
    12.4 self regulation
    12.5 ask government to share in the admin costs of the fund
    12.6 eliminate default cost sharing
    12.7 TCAF should have access to student records of closed school for train-out purposes
    12.8 Elimination of OSAP tuition capping

Question # 13 - What role, if any, should the government play in respect to the financing of TCAF?
    13.1 government could loan TCAF the start up funds or a loan guarantee
    13.2 government to be a back stopper on the fund
    13.3 government should partner in the fund by kicking in some money
    13.4 government to take responsibility for the students train out because of government imposed closures
    13.5 government should take responsibility for helping school stay open

    1. Fund amount depends on stability of the schools
    2. Ministry and school owners (multi-province) provide information on history/costs of train-outs/closures
    3. each school has to invest in each of five years
    4. if school is purchased by new owners and don't touch the fund they don't start clock 0.

Question # 3 - Who should pay the TCAF premiums (students or institutions)?
Invisible - built into tuition - raise fees accordingly

Question # 4 - Should there be a limit on the amount of payout from the fund in respect to any one closing, or any one student?
    a) Student
        · Need actuarial analysis
        · Solvency issues of fund
        · Payout - to max of tuition pd prorated

Should non-OACC members belong to fund?
Depends if belong to another trade organization.

Question # 1 - How many directors should serve on the governing body of TCAF? What should be the composition of the governing body? How should the directors be selected?
    · 4 reps (OACC), 2 reps (non-OACC), 1 each from: financial, legal, student/graduate
    · Why have students? What can they contribute? ? impractical
    · Graduate preferably instead of student
    · Why have non-OACC members? If they choose not to be OACC members, why would they be on the board?
    · Should include both OACC and non-OACC
    · Agree with including both OACC and on-OACC because it gives a broadness of opinions
    · Whole purpose is to regulate industry then what is to gain by making it non-inclusive
    · Member of public colleges and universities to see how they regulate
    · Assume if we reach out to OACC and non-OACC it is for government support
    · Ensure small schools are represented
    · Instead of graduate involve someone who has experience with train-out
    · Don't see value because want a perspective from a different/positive model
    · Need to give students credit for their experience may cut off innovative ideas
    · Why have student a part of "consumer protection". What do they have to contribute? (Do banks have consumers add to their protection branch?)
    · Getting back to grassroots
    · 4 ? Yes to value of student
    · 19 ? No to value of student
    · Who are the non-OACC participants?
    · Industry members who are non-OACC
    · What proportion is OACC to non-OACC? OACC represents 80% of students
    · Is OACC driven but is supposed to represent whole industry
    · Non-OACC member felt that it was for whole industry because it is about students not schools
    · Size of fund: more who participate will decrease burden for other schools
    · Industry rep. non and OACC relative to their share of the industry
    · Define "relative to share"
        o Student numbers
        o Based on number of schools
    · More than one rep from one company?
    · Ensure representation from small schools
    · Ensure rep from all schools

Question # 2 - Should the TCAF organization be strictly volunteer or should the board have the authority to engage staff to administer the fund?
    · Establish a nominating committee
    · Establishing a steering committee to develop process
    · How long would one be on the board? Fixed terms?
    · Travel fund model? For board terms
    · Be careful of musical chairs
    · Geographic distribution so Toronto doesn't dominate
    · How do you avoid Toronto domination? Don't think it is relevant
    · What is the point of limiting board terms?
    · Term limits, but have reelections
    · Volunteer versus hired staff
        o Like part-time executive and one full time administrator
        o Work within the context of the budget
        o Afraid the admin fees would take over train-out fund
        o Modest approach to admin costs
        o To do board work voluntary and have paid staff "is asking the impossible" (1 person did not support)
    · Lottery selection, if there is a lot of interest and use geographic selection
    · Picking individuals who represent a certain part of each sector
    · Steering committee should represent particular constituencies
    · How do we select steering committee?
        o Lottery? No.
        o Selection - initial steering committee made up of people who have actually worked on TCAF (because learning curve is so great) ? instead of starting from scratch

Question # 3 - What should the major areas of authority be for the governing body?
    · Decide who is or is not in good standing (i.e., paid)
    · Selection process for who is going to come in (eligibility)
    · Board should decide whether or not to use train-out or refund
    · Don't look at financial viability
    · Can buy liability Assurance
    · Board should set a cap/ceiling on fund
    · Limit on one time pay outs?
    · Must be PVS registered and comply with those regulations
    · Hire administration and marketing, establish budget
    · Establish committees
    · Marketing
    · Control budget and plan annual meeting
    · Setting premium rates
    · Investing trust funds
    · Conduct the day-to-day business of TCAF

Question # 4 - Should a steering committee be formed to manage the process of developing the TCAF concept until a board can be appointed? If so, how should steering committee members be chosen?
· Must have most $ in fund ? pay chairman very well to manage fund properly

Question # 5 - What role, if any, should the government play in the governance of the fund?
    · No government participation except if they reduce premiums
    · Involved on an advisory level, buy-in, possible financial contribution (no formal role)
    · How are they involved with TICO? Advisory only

Question # 1 - Should participation in TCAF be limited to private career colleges that are currently regulated under provincial act and regulations only? Or, should TCAF be open to private universities or unregistered private training organizations, or private not-for-profit training organizations, or private elementary and secondary schools?
· No other groups other than PCC (all but one member supports)

Question # 2 - Should participation in TCAF be denied to educational institutions having an ownership that has previously owned another educational institution that had closed and had students access the TCAF fund for train-out purposes? If so, could such institutions be eligible for participation if arrangements are made to reimburse the fund for the cost incurred for any such previous train-out?
    · May be hard to exclude previously bankrupt schools
    · Higher premiums ? which may exclude those who abuse fund (i.e., car Assurance) ? problem with this is enforcement ? people will find a way around it if they are motivated
    · Higher premiums should be considerable
    · Full reimbursement (13 support)
    · Higher (2 support)

Question # 3 - Should educational institutions that are both private career colleges regulated under the act and regulations, and private universities be allowed to participate in TCAF in respect to their diploma programs only, and not their degree programs?
· Where would a PCC who offers diploma and degree-granting fit into this model?
· All diploma programs that are a part of the PCC (the PCC section only)

Question # 1 - If TCAF coverage is only provided to TCAF participating institutions in good standing, what happens to students enrolled at closed schools that are non-participating institutions or not in good standing?

Non-Participating

Not in Good Standing (premiums not paid)

- would not be covered by fund (don't pay into fund, don't get covered)

- don't pay in a set period, they aren't covered
- if fund doesn't cover and students aren't reimbursed - reflects badly - how are premiums paid? Annually, monthly, quarterly
- if school pays up premiums then good-standing reinstated
- long standing good member will have premiums paid up by fund
- only students covered while school was in good standing, when school is not in good standing then these students are not covered
- seriously in arrears students will be covered how do we notify students when coverage begins or when it stops (if applicable)
- when a student has been notified by the fund they are covered they will continue to receive coverage

· Buyer beware ? apart of the marketing campaign to let students know of availability

Question # 2 - Should students who are already part of the way through a program at a participating institution when the fund is first implemented be eligible for TCAF coverage as part of a grandfathering clause?
· Yes, with a prorated premium

Question # 3 - Should it be mandatory for all students who have paid their own tuition to have coverage under TCAF?
· Yes, if participating institution in program

Question # 4 - Should students who have had their tuition fully paid by a third party agency such as WSIB be eligible for TCAF coverage?
· No, don't cover WSIB
· Yes, you are covering student, would be problematic from public relations standpoint ? all agree except one

Question # 5 - Should students enrolled in unregistered or certificate programs at a participating institution be eligible for coverage under TCAF?
    · Only diploma programs (9 support)
    · Yes there should be coverage
    · Coverage for the institution should cover all students
    · Does not cover certificate programs
    · Should be registered programs only
    · All student participants (9 support)

Question # 6 - Should all students enrolled in registered programs at a participating institution be required to be covered under TCAF? Or, should students be given the right to opt out?
· No, students shouldn't be allowed to opt out

Question # 7 - Should students enrolled in degree programs at participating institutions be eligible for TCAF coverage?
· For degree granting institutions PVS diploma programs only

Question # 8 - Should international students enrolled at participating educational institutions be eligible or required to be covered under TCAF?
· Yes, support for TCAF covering international students (support ? all but one)

Group: Marketing and Public Communications
Facilitator: Judy Smith
Scribe: Stuart Bentley

Who to advertise to:
    · Advertise to students
    · Get word out to guidance offices
    · Funding sources like HRDC, WSIB, Assurance companies, banks
    · Non-participating schools
    · Hiring companies

What is covered?
    · Diplomas
    · All courses
    · Message is "your training is safe"

What should we be saying?
    · Protection
    · Security
    · Almost guaranteeing that training will be completed
    · Increases credibility of PCC
    · Who is governing body?

What should we say?
    · Analogy good
    · House-keeping seal of approval
    · Quality is key
    · VQA stamp of approval in wine industry similar to ISO 9000 concept
    · Concern about marketing a message about safe tuition
    · Creates doubt about school
    · Marketing strategy about credibility of entire industry
    · Don't front-end market the Assurance fund
    · Anyone showing this logo is quality school
    · Question about duplicating OACC efforts?
    · Copy of refund policy
    · Shows TCAF information
    · More targeted collateral for specific agencies
    · Assurance is subordinate to quality message
    · Message to funders of guarantee "students are getting taken care of"

What materials?
    · Pamphlet
    · Competing against universities and colleges
    · Should indicate industry statistics, graduates
    · Flyer available to members for selective use
    · Potentially one flyer to students, one flyer to lenders
    · Logo would be excellent
    · Ability to use logo in school calendar, newspaper ad, virtually all materials
    · Website link to TCAF website

Contents
    · What is covered?
    · Who gets to use it?
    · Don't put details about what happens when a school goes bankrupt
    · Don't put seeds of doubt in public mind

Who should produce materials?
    · Fund must come up with guidelines of how to produce materials
    · Control quality of materials
    · Create brand equity - this is a _______ school
    · Create rules of use
    · Don't want to have a bureaucracy to approve ads
    · Industry will point finger at schools misusing the logo

Role of public relations?
    · Hesitate to run TV ads
    · Selective P.R.
    · Get government official to talk about PCC as viable option
    · Important tool in broad P.R. campaign
    · Bring in someone to "crunch" some messages
    · Further evidence of industry responsibility
    · Use part of fund to build core messaging
    · Proactive marketing
    · Redefining membership requirements to be associated with the group
    · Definition of quality needs to be done
    · Maintain an annual report and budget

Government Involvement
· Want their blessing and back-off
· Encourage to participate under our direction

First time there is a problem?
    · Prefer industry to lead P.R.
    · Get owner, Ministry and fund to get involved
    · Get SWAT team led by Paul to get involved
    · Ideally owner, TCAF, like a volunteer fire department
    · SWAT team minimizing PR risk
    · Fund risk
    · Viability of fund
    · Fund will pay for P.R.
    · SWAT team leader will lead P.R. campaign if school goes under

Areas of consensus
    · More than 1 audience that we are marketing to
    · Keep TCAF simple and subordinate to PCC
    · Thousands of grads / quality of schools
    · 1 logo / flyers (different audiences)
    · guidelines for materials and message
    · have TCAF create flyers and print them
    · centrally funded marketing
    · use SWAT team including government rep when school fails

Areas of disagreement
· extent of explanation of fund details
· level of government involvement in train out or situations (SWAT team)

Points of discussion
    · Who/how does membership get decided
    · Budget - need more information
    · Who spends the money
    · What is included in fund needs decision before it can be added to marketing materials
    · Is fee included in tuition or is it an add-on? Huge difference in marketing message

· Question the necessity of doing an active TCAF campaign ? may backfire and promote negativity for the industry ? there is no chance that a public school would go under
· Need to promote active campaign ? need to counteract the negative press that currently exists