SHEEO Information Request
Geographic Service Areas Query
June 20, 2014
Query:
Dear Academic Officers:
Your colleague in Colorado asks:
Do you know to what extent SHEEO agencies are still regulating geographic service areas? As institutions are continuing to expand their offerings (both at physical off-campus sites and online) I think that our policies may need to be updated. Do you know if there has been any discussion among agencies or surveys that discuss the current state of program/geographic approvals?
Please reply back to this email by June 20, 2014.
Responses:
Alabama Commission On Higher Education
Below is the link to the Alabama Commission on Higher Education (ACHE), “Commission Policy on Off-
Campus Instruction”. http://www.ache.alabama.gov/Content/Departments/Instruction/OffCampus/Regulations.PDF
The service area off-campus instruction guidelines for two-year colleges and universities (for both courses and programs)are detailed therein.
These guidelines are being reviewed in the general context of updating ACHE’s Policies and Procedures
Manual.
I am not aware of any surveys that discuss the current state of program/geographic approvals.
If, through your inquiry, you do find survey information on this topic, please send me a copy electronically.
Arizona

Connecticut
In response to your email, Connecticut regulations require institutions that wish to expand their offerings must 1) notify our office of each off site offering along with location and 2 ) request approval of any change in delivery of instruction (online, on ground, hybrid).
State University System of Florida Board of Governors
The Board of Governors of the State University System of Florida abandoned the concept of geographically defined service areas in 2011. With the expansion of distance education and cooperative program efforts between universities, the service area concept was becoming increasing blurred. In addition, geographic boundaries were originally established along county lines and in the past 25 years major metropolitan population centers have grown across these political boundaries.
With the 2011 promulgation of Regulation 8.004, Academic Program Coordination, and Regulation
8.009, Educational Sites, the emphasis shifted from defined service areas to a proximity approach for coordinating academic program delivery in Florida. The Educational Site regulation established a clear process for classifying and managing educational sites and defines the Main Campus, Type I, II, and III additional campuses, which are required to be approved by the Board of Governors. The Academic
Program Coordination regulation requires that universities must seek approval from the Chancellor and the Chair of the Board of Governors to offer college-credit degree or certificate programs, or substantial parts of a program, if it requires a substantial physical presence at a location in Florida other than the
Main Campus, or an approved Type I, II or III additional campus. This allows for an evaluation of the impact such offerings might have on programs at other universities and helps to identify and control unnecessary duplication.
So far this new policy appears to be working effectively, although it does require a certain amount of policing on the part of board staff. The referenced regulations can be found on our website at http://www.flbog.edu/about/regulations/regulations.php
.
Kansas Board of Regents
The policy for Kansas was updated in April, 2013, which can be reviewed at this link: http://www.kansasregents.org/policy_chapter_iii_a_off_campus_delivery
Kentucky
Kentucky does not “regulate” geographic service areas per se. However, they are considered in the academic program approval process as well as the review of existing programs.
Missouri Department of Higher Education
Geographic service areas remain a prickly issue in Missouri. The members of the Missouri Community
College Association have drawn, and have agreed to respect, voluntary service regions, although the
Coordinating Board for Higher Education has never officially endorsed them. Our policies for new program approval, off-site delivery of programs, dual credit programs, and lower-division coursework all account for geography and service areas. There are frequent disagreements over territory, usually between a community college and a nearby university, which our office is asked to mediate. This issue is clouded by convoluted policy—drafted to appease various sectors and interests—that is outdated in some instances and painfully vague in others. These disputes have become quite heated in several cases, stoked by fervent competition for student tuition dollars amid declining state support. And, of course, distance education has called into question the very idea of geographic service regions.

We are embarking on a comprehensive review of our policies, and we hope to address some of these recurrent issues, but those discussions are just beginning. I’d be happy to discuss our efforts if you are interested.
New Mexico
New Mexico’s GARs involve all two-year college (branches and independents).
The responsibilities of the host institutions are:

Determine the programs needed to support workforce demands within the GAR.
Provide educational services, to include dual credit, developmental education, adult basic education and literacy programs, and non-credit workforce training.
Plus a few others….
All of the details are in 5.2.4 [NMAC], the state rule covering GARs.
Oklahoma
The Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education has geographic service areas for physical off-campus sites. There are no geographic service areas for online courses.
Utah System of Higher Education
I n Utah, the State Board of Regents recently approved a revision to R315 , Service Area Designation and
Coordination of Off-Campus Courses and Programs . Among other things, this policy reaffirms institutional service regions, provides a process for right of first refusal, and establishes pre-approved
Regent exceptions to programs and courses offered outside of a designated service region. The following policy sections may be of interest to Colorado:
4.7. Right of First Refusal and Primary Responsibility: Within designated service areas, the local institution(s) has/have the right of first refusal and the first responsibility to provide programs consistent with mission and role assignments and to coordinate other offerings. After consultation and with the concurrence of the institution(s) designated to serve a particular area, other state institutions may provide needed lower division and other courses, that do not fall within the designated service provider(s)’ mission and role assignments, interests, and/or capacities. Institutions shall designate a person responsible for responding to constituent requests for course and program delivery. Requests from constituents in Page 3 of 4 File: R315 another state institution’s designated service area shall be forwarded to the contact person of the appropriate designated service area provider. When the designated service area provider is unable to respond to a constituent request, the designated person within the institution should attempt to identify a possible alternative provider from within the USHE.
4.8. Regents-Approved Exceptions to Geographic Service Areas: Special circumstances involving such matters as methods of instruction, funding sources or mission and role assignments may result in exceptions to the geographic service area role assignments.
4.8.1.Technology-Delivered Instruction: Technologically-delivered courses and programs afford an efficient and effective means for Utah colleges and universities to provide broader and more economical access to high quality instruction. Courses or programs delivered via technology in

asynchronous faculty-student interaction (fully “on-line” programs)are exceptions to the geographic service area designations.
4.8.2.Special Contract Courses: Self-supporting special contract courses, conferences, or programs with industry, government, or school districts not open to the general public will be exceptions under Regent guidelines.
4.8.3. Exclusive Statewide Program Roles: Certain exclusive statewide or regional program roles have been assigned to particular institutions. These institutions may provide programs outside their respective service areas under Regent guidelines. The institutional service areas are specified in R315.7.
Virginia
In Virginia, as relates to public institution programming, community colleges are the default providers of face-to-face lower division instruction within their service areas (and every geographic area is served by a community college). 4-year institutions need specific approval from SCHEV to offer lower division instruction at any higher education centers, off-campus sites, or in dual enrollment arrangements with public school districts. This restriction applies only to face-to-face instruction—all institutions are free to offer online instruction within Virginia to anyone in any location.
There have not been discussion here yet about altering the above-described geographic differentiation between community colleges and four year institutions. I think the net overall feeling is that it provides an appropriate mission-related distinction between types of institution that contributes to efficiency and student service.
Washington
The public baccalaureates do not have restricted or regulated service areas in Washington. I’m checking with our community and technical college system to see if they are still using service areas but have not heard back yet.