The Roadmap, Phase II: Revising the G&P — A letter from the CoA chair

Conversations involved in developing the revised “Guidelines and Principles for Accreditation”

At the Oct. 18-21, 2012 meeting we took a first look at the public comment solicited in Phase I of the G&P Roadmap. We were pleased that so many groups and individuals took the time to respond to our questions. We will leave the link to the Phase I comments on the CoA website, and will leave them there indefinitely so individuals and groups can continue to refer to them as we move through the next several steps of the process. 

As we indicated when we first introduced our plan for the G&P Roadmap, we want this to be an iterative process. To that end we had outlined a tentative timeline; it is important for everyone to understand that this is a timeline, not a deadline. Going forward, our decisions about what to do when will be driven primarily by the conversations — both in person and electronic — that CoA has with the many groups it represents; CoA will not be driven by completing the process for an arbitrary deadline. We also are in the process of exploring alternative ways to expand our ability to engage individuals in conversations with CoA through various electronic mechanisms. 

With that in mind, we want to begin the next phase of our interactions with you. We spent a substantial amount of time during the meeting reviewing the responses we received and deciding what we still might need to know. In so doing, we were guided by a few ideas. First we tried to identify places where there was substantial agreement among those who commented; where there was, we tried to develop questions that would help us identify unintended consequences of thinking about the issue in that way. Second, we tried to identify areas where there was disagreement; when we identified those areas, we tried to develop questions that would help us think more clearly about exactly what the underlying issue might be, and how it could best be addressed. 

Now that we have formulated our next set of questions, we need to pose them to everyone. For now, this will happen in two ways. For those of you who will be meeting in the next six to eight months, we would like to have time on your meeting agenda to discuss these questions in person. Some of you have already made time for us; if your group was one of those, please let us know when we have been scheduled so we can finalize who from CoA will be there. Some of you may not have confirmed time for us; if your group is one of those, please let me know a) if you’d like us to come, and b) when you would like us to be there. If your group does not want a representative from CoA there or is not meeting, that is fine as well; please just let us know. For all of your groups, I would strongly suggest that you involve those CoA members who represent your council in any discussions regarding the revision of the G&P. Every CoA member actively participated in reviewing responses and developing questions, and your CoA member could be an invaluable resource to you as you move through this process. In addition, within the next month or so we will put these follow-up questions out for public comment. We anticipate having those questions remain up through June 2013. That will allow the CoA to be informed not only from our in-person meetings but also through other activities individuals and groups engage in that may help to address some of the important education and training issues raised. During this time period we will schedule opportunities for individuals to interact electronically with CoA and for those opportunities to be archived so others might be able to view and comment on them. By maintaining the response for each phase online and allowing for interactions with groups and individuals using a variety of formats, our goal is to continue an open and transparent process. 

Elizabeth A. Klonoff, PhD, ABPP
Chair, APA Commission on Accreditation

The public comment period continues through at least June 30, 2013