« GENERAL SECRETARY’S REPORT TO THE COMMUNITY | Main | ALBERT'S HISTORIC FIRST GAY MARRIAGE IN BOSTON »
April 2, 2004
EDITOR INTERVIEWS CHAIRPERSON of CPSP's ACCREDITATION COMMISSION
Perry Miller, Editor: Roger, thanks for your willingness to talk with the PR about CPSP's new Standards for Accreditation of Clinical Pastoral Education (CPE) and Psychotherapy Training Centers that will be implemented as CPSP seeks Department of Education (DOE) recognition.
Roger Mace, Accreditation Commission Chairperson: Thank you Perry for this opportunity to communicate to our membership some of the underlying thoughts and developments that have contributed to the decision to move forward with this new direction for Accreditation of CPE and Pastoral Psychotherapy Training Centers. Naturally, we should expect some confusion about this process, and in that confusion it is likely that we would have some reluctance to moving with any change. We will wonder if this threatens our status as Diplomates, who have been functioning as qualified instructors and program directors, who offer training by virtue of our certification. We also may have questions of how this may affect our Chapters who have enjoyed a great deal of autonomy in supervising our Training Centers and/or Programs. Of course, many of us in CPSP Chapters have an aversion to building up a bureaucratic Commission which might compute to more organization than we may want to endorse.
First of all, I believe it is important to make a distinction between CPSP seeking Department of Education (DOE) recognition and CPSP developing new Accreditation standards. They appear to be tied together and that is mostly due to the timing of their introduction by our Association. For some time many within our body have recognized the need for CPSP specific guidelines for our site visit teams. Our membership and training programs are scattered throughout this country. Our ability to bring some uniformity in accountability standards has been difficult due primarily to the lack of CPSP accreditation overseers. We have a need to develop a model that is uniquely CPSP. The possibility of DOE recognition has helped CPSP to move forward with the new Accreditation standards in a structured and speedier fashion. Even though DOE requires us to develop these Accreditation standards, we have the desire, nonetheless, to proceed in order to meet our Accreditation needs. I believe it is helpful to mention that the Certification process has also come under review primarily because we are a growing organization and have a need for consistency in our acceptance and ratification of potential members. The Council has appointed Bill Carr, Chairperson of the Governing Council's Committee on Certification. There is much similarity between the Certification process and the Accreditation process as to organization and accountability standards.
Perry Miller, Editor: As the appointed chair of CPSP’s Accreditation Commission, I assume you see benefits to CPSP coming under the umbrella of the DOE. I'm sure you are aware, however, that some in our community will be questioning the wisdom of such a move. Certainly this moves CPSP and its training centers deeper into bureaucracy.
Roger Mace, Accreditation Commission Chairperson: You must be careful in assuming too much. I am one who tends to ask questions when I don’t understand or if I detect some possible inconsistency. I was not immediately attracted to this new idea. I voiced some of the same objections as, I’m sure, many have and will yet voice about such a bold move. I was asked to find my own answers and wrestle with this Accreditation Commission process by becoming the chair. That certainly placed me in a difficult position, but I was determined that I would not promote something that I didn’t believe in or had some serious question about the need. In order to avoid circular thinking I took this proposal to my Chapter (comprised of 13 Diplomates, 3 Pastoral Counselors, 6 Diplomates Emeritus, 2 Diplomates in Training,) and had stimulating and lengthy discussions at two of our Chapter meetings. I wrote the results of these consultations in a letter to the Council, which subsequently voiced approval of our modified proposal.
Our Chapter, first of all, wanted to assess how this would impact our Covenant. I believe I am not unlike many of our members who embrace the Covenant with pathos and respect. I believe it is essential that any new developments, however innovative and praised, must be checked against our prized community agreement which must not be compromised. The Stoney Mountain/Asheville Chapter has presented a version of the Covenant that we feel is consistent with the original document but allows for flexibility and organizational change in our training programs and certification of members. It is helpful that we have three members of our Chapter that are Charter members of CPSP. The Council positively considered the Covenant revision at the Council meeting at Virginia Beach in March 2004. You will find the new document on our website.
Secondly, our Chapter looked at the language of the Covenant regarding bureaucracy. Our understanding is that the founding members wanted to avoid with great passion the bureaucratic mess often associated with accreditation. The fires kindled during our early gatherings have not died down. There would likely be great dismay among our more seasoned member if CPSP seeks to identify with other pastoral care organizations by endorsing similar organizational governance. I believe that the answer to this dilemma is located in the Covenant itself. The CPSP founding fathers, I believe, exerted great wisdom in adopting the Chapter life as a unique governance concept. This is our greatest distinction from other pastoral care associations. Because we have close association with these organizations and many of us have memberships in these sister professional groups, we are prone to be influenced to slowly compromise our organizational philosophy and adopt centrality of governance. At first sight this seems to be the most efficient form of governance, but wisdom tells us it can choke life out of the membership. The CPSP mother organization or Council does not interfere in a Chapter’s certification of Diplomates, Pastoral Counselors and Chaplains. I believe we have wisely insisted upon ratification by the Counsel and that a member of the council or appointed member outside the Chapter be present to give assurance of uniformity, fairness, and accountability. All of this, I believe is in agreement with the Covenant.
We reasoned that if a Chapter is qualified to render judgment regarding the certification of a member, then they are equally qualified to make decisions regarding the accreditation of a training program or center? We propose that the Chapter assume responsibility for the Training Programs and Centers in much the same way as the certification process. In the new Accreditation Manual there is explicit responsibility given to the CPSP Chapter under Section V. Center Self Evaluations. “Every CPSP Chapter takes full ownership of its Centers, and all Diplomates impose upon themselves continuous self-evaluation processes.” In other words, the Chapter will be monitoring the Center’s growth and progress continuously and not only during the site visit. This, I believe, affords the greatest accountability and nurturance possible. No other pastoral care organization can claim such oversight. The Chapter knows the Center’s program and Supervisor intimately. I believe we can assume the greatest accountability possible by enlisting the Chapter to assume a major role in evaluating a Center for accreditation. This unique plan endorses the Chapter to take responsibility for the site visits and not exclusively the Accreditation Commission. The Accreditation Commission will review the Chapter recommendations and ratify them when they are in compliance with the guidelines stated in the manual and Accreditation Protocol. Similar to the certification process, the Chapter Accreditation Commissioner and/or Committee must have a Diplomate outside the Chapter Accreditation Committee appointed by the Association Accreditation Commission.
Perry Miller, Editor: To be blunt about it, if CPSP ends up with the same bureaucratic hurdles as now exist in the ACPE, why choose CPSP as the CPE accrediting body when ACPE has been around longer and has greater name recognition?
Roger Mace, Accreditation Commission Chairperson: Because of what I have previously discussed, I believe we do not have to stumble over these common bureaucratic hurdles. The Association Accreditation Commission bears the responsibility of assuring uniformity of requirements, education of the Commissioners, evaluating the qualification of the Chapter members serving as Site Visitors, consulting with the Chapter’s site visit team leader, assessing for bias and conflict of interest among the site visit team, reviewing the Chapter Accreditation Committee’s work and ratifying the recommendation. I believe this is about as bureaucratic as we want to become.
CPSP is now recognized in the field of pastoral education along side of ACPE as an alternative to both clinical pastoral education and pastoral psychotherapy training. I don’t believe that CPSP or ACPE members need feel threatened by two organizations serving the same population. CPSP philosophy is different from ACPE and, therefore, our Training Centers and Programs will reflect that uniqueness. Pastoral Educators and Psychotherapists now have a choice. Some centers may only be ACPE Centers, some only CPSP Centers and a number may be dually accredited. It is our hope, for example, to endorse collaborative site visit teams from both AAPC and CPSP, in order to have a dual accreditation process for a potential AAPC/CPSP Training Center. I believe both organizations will be served well by such openness and mutual respect for each other, and that we have nothing to fear in this kind of undertaking. It is not the intent of CPSP to replace ACPE, AAPC, or any other organization, but to merely work along side our sister organizations. This is the spirit of Comiss, our umbrella organization, and it is our hope that this spirit will prevail.
Perry Miller, Editor: Can you give us a thumbnail sketch of what will be involved for a training program to become an accredited CPSP training center?
Roger Mace, Accreditation Commission Chairperson: Each Diplomate Chapter will select one Diplomate to serve as a Chapter Accreditation Liaison. This individual will become acquainted with the Accreditation Manual and the Site Visit Protocol. When a Chapter’s Training Center/Program wishes to be accredited, the Chapter Accreditation Liaison would be notified so as to begin forming a site visit team of at least three qualified Diplomates, one of which will be a Diplomate from the Accreditation Commission. This team will perform the evaluation as per the Manual’s instruction. Before the site visit teams work, the Chapter Accreditation Liaison will bring together the Training Center/Program Director/Instructor and the Chapter members for a self-study. Upon completion of this self-study the Accreditation Liaison will complete an application for accreditation and send via e-mail to the Accreditation Commission Chairperson. Upon completion of the site visit, the Chapter will review the site visit team’s report and subsequently sends the report to the Accreditation Commission for ratification prior to the Annual Meeting of CPSP. A certificate will be sent to the Center upon ratification.
Perry Miller, Editor: It is my understanding that currently accredited CPSP training centers, meaning centers that have had an official Accreditation Site Review with site visitors appointed by the Governing Council, will not fall under the new Accreditation Standards until their current accreditation expires.
Roger Mace, Accreditation Commission Chairperson: Yes, you are correct. Accreditation is for seven years. If a Center is currently accredited with CPSP, the Center will not need to have a review until their seven years has expired.
Perry Miller, Editor: Until CPSP becomes officially under the auspices of the DOE, I assume CPSP CPE centers that have not had their official accreditation site review can do so according to CPSP's current Standards.
Roger Mace, Accreditation Commission Chairperson: Yes, Centers may become accredited by following the current Standards. However, the current standards are now listed in the new Accreditation Manual and have been adopted by the March 2004 Annual Meeting in Virginia Beach. You will notice that the current standards are not radically different from previous standards, but uniformity of standards is now required.
The paper work will not be the hallmark of the Accreditation process, as it may have been previously. We will be suggesting other ways to document how well a Training Program/Center may be functioning. The Commission has decided that all of our work at the Commission level will be by electronic mail/media. We will only be accepting e-mail, CD’s or DVD’s in our reviews. Documentation may include still pictures, voice, or video. We understand that a mere paper review may not tell the full story of what is going on in CPE or Pastoral Psychotherapy Training. These procedures are in place now even though the DOE has not officially recognized CPSP.
Perry Miller, Editor: Wow! You've just knocked my socks off. I know I hear you correctly when you stated "... paper work will not be the hallmark of the Accreditation process..." The creative commitment to use the electronic media is exciting. One thing is for sure, you are not putting new wine in old wineskins with this bold move designed to dramatically alter the accrediation review process. If I'm not careful here I could lose the focus of this particular interview. At a later date, I hope we can talk in more detail about the Commission's innovative approach to accreditation of training centers.
Roger Mace, Accreditation Commission Chairperson: Thank you for your complement. We are pleased with this development and we think this will add substance to the whole accreditation review process. I would welcome talking with you about our vision to genuinely alter the reveiw process utilizing the electronic media.
Perry Miller, Editor: For sure, you are not handling all of these accreditation matters alone. Who else serves with you on the CPSP Accreditation Commission and can you briefly say a little about each of these members?
Roger Mace, Accreditation Commission Chairperson: I can tell you that it will be comprised of seven persons including 6 CPSP Diplomates and one public representative (non-CPSP Diplomate). The Diplomate members are Chairperson Roger L. Mace, Ken Blank, Ben Bogia, John Harris, Beng-Imm Low, and Henry Uy. David Plummer is our non CPSP public member. Members are elected by the CPSP membership at its annual conference for three year terms of office with the right for one consecutive succession. Public members may not be employed by or associated with agencies or institutions which have service contracts with CPSP Centers. Public members may be members of cognate ministry or chaplaincy groups, but may not be officers or staff of those groups, nor may they be spouse, parent, child, or sibling of anyone affiliated with a CPSP Center, or any CPSP officer or employee or staff member of any cognate ministry or chaplaincy group.
Perry Miller, Editor: Anything else you would want to communicate to our readers about what the future holds for CPSP as we travel with these new accreditation standards?
Roger Mace, Accreditation Commission Chairperson: I am hoping that I can adequately communicate to our potential audience of Accredited Centers that this is to be a collaborative experience that promotes the growth and benefit of any Training Program or Center. The Council does not want this to be a frightening or laborious process that discourages or burdens any of our Diplomate Trainers or Directors. My goal is to hold to that ideal. I, too, am not fond of paper work that feels more like redundancy than worth. We must achieve the purposes of Accreditation without making it dreadful. I look forward to making that happen for CPSP. I am open to questions from our membership regarding any of the above. I may be reached at rogerm@pcsda.org.
Perry Miller, Editor: Roger Thanks for talking with us. I don't need to tell you that you have taken on a big job. From what I hear many think you were an excellent choice to provide leadership as CPSP continues to move into its new and developing future. Good luck!
Roger Mace, Accreditation Commission Chairperson: Thank you again. Yes, I do believe there is much work that has and will yet be involved in instituting this change in our organization. I recognize my limitations and will become very appreciative of the support of many in CPSP. I believe there is much before us that will need to be clarified and developed more fully. We do know enough to begin, the rest we can learn on the job.
Posted by Perry Miller, Editor at April 2, 2004 8:08 AM