April 2006, Vol. 16, No. 2
Table of Contents
CCE Recognition by USDE Set to Expire • CCE Response Spurs Follow-up Complaint • Differentiating Neuromuscular from Musculoligamentous Subluxation • Chiropractic Pioneer Passes Away • Early Life Infections Improve the Function of the Immune System • European Spine Journal Publishes PosturePrint® Study • ICA Defending Chiropractic from PT's • Immunization • Letters to the Editor • Life University Teaches CBP® as an Elective • The Ineffectiveness of Over Accommodating • Parker College and Seminars Begin Celebration Preparations • PosturePrint® Used to Determine Stability of Upright Posture • CBP® Hits 91 Publications • Thanks for Helping Your Local HMO Grow! • The Perfect Chiropractic Storm • Three Keys to Practice Success • Building Wealth Securely: Maintenance, Not Pain Relief •
back to front page
CCE Recognition by USDE Set to Expire:
Revocation of CCE Recognition Based on Accreditation Failings Urged
by Jennifer L. Zingone, DC
Dr. Jennifer Zingone and her fiancé, Dr. Mark Kordonski, enjoy a rewarding family practice in Aberdeen, Maryland. Dr. Zingone is a 2003 magna cum laude graduate of Life West. Having completed almost all her education at Life University, Dr. Zingone transferred to Life West when Life’s accreditation was abruptly revoked. Certified in pediatric chiropractic and the Webster technique, Dr. Zingone is a Fellow of the International Chiropractic Pediatric Association. In 2001 Dr. Zingone participated in a mission trip to help introduce chiropractic to the people of Cuzco, Peru. Dr. Zingone can be reached at drjen@optimalspinechiro.com.
Much has been written about the 2002 revocation of Life University’s (LUCC) accreditation by the Council on Chiropractic Education (CCE). Many articles have appeared that spoke of the damage caused to LUCC by CCE’s action. In contrast, almost nothing has been published about CCE’s own recognition process with the United States Department of Education (USDE), or the damage to LUCC students caused by CCE’s actions. It has been a well kept secret in the chiropractic profession that CCE’s recognition expires in June 2006, and that the USDE held a public comment period concerning renewal of CCE’s recognition. Also kept from public view are the details of the hardships faced by hundreds of LUCC students during the 2002 accreditation fiasco.
I was a 13th quarter student when CCE revoked LUCC’s accreditation. I felt then as I do now, that the education I received at LUCC was second to none, and the loss of accreditation had nothing to do with the quality of curriculum. My life was turned upside down after the accreditation decision, but I consider myself one of the lucky ones.
Although far more in debt than I should be, I made it through the ordeal and finished my chiropractic education. Unfortunately many of my classmates never made it, the obstacles set before them were too much to overcome and potentially great chiropractors are lost to the profession forever. I have waited almost four years and have read almost every story and public document concerning CCE and LUCC. All these years later and still no public acknowledgement of the student’s sacrifices and no actions that attempt to address the most unparalleled injustice in the history of chiropractic education. When I discovered that the USDE was accepting comments on the renewal of CCE’s recognition until March 8, 2006, I wasted no time gathering my papers and preparing my letter. The goal of this article and my letter to the USDE is to piece together the public documents revealing some of the history of CCE’s accreditation decision against LUCC, and finally bring to light some of the untold story of the innocent students who were caught in the middle of a political firestorm. I do not pretend to know what is best for the chiropractic profession, but I do know progress cannot be made by hiding the truth. Printed below is my letter to the USDE, it is my hope that actions will be taken to never again allow innocent students to be placed in harms way.March 6, 2006Ms. Robin GreathouseAccreditation and State LiaisonU.S. Department of Education1990 K Street N.W., Room 7105Washington, DC 20006-8509Re: THE COUNCIL ON CHIROPRACTIC EDUCATION
Dear Ms. Greathouse,
Please consider this comment concerning renewal of recognition of the Council on Chiropractic Education (CCE). I am aware that CCE has been cited for violations of the United States Department of Education (USDE) Secretary’s Criteria for Recognition. I am also aware that some of these violations relate to the accreditation decision concerning Life University College of Chiropractic (LUCC).
After reviewing all available public documents, it appears that CCE was in violation of USDE criteria during the timeframe that its Commission on Accreditation (COA) reached its decision to revoke LUCC’s accreditation. It also appears that the decision was negligent and politically motivated. The actions of CCE in this matter have caused me and hundreds of others incalculable financial, emotional, and professional harm with ramifications that may last our entire lifetimes. CCE’s flawed decision to revoke LUCC’s accreditation damaged the lives of almost all LUCC students. The most severely affected however were those like myself and hundreds of others who were in the final months of the Doctor of Chiropractic program. While 14th quarter students were literally weeks away from graduation, my classmates and I, as 13th quarter students, were only four months shy of graduation when CCE announced its accreditation decision.
Timing the revocation to become effective in the middle of an academic quarter, as opposed to the end, meant that students were forced to not only forfeit the time and academic credit they had already spent in the quarter, but also their tuition and living expenses. The revocation decision caused severe life and family disruption as LUCC students, especially those with working spouses and school age children, were forced to suddenly leave their homes, jobs and schools to relocate. CCE failed to consider these consequences and no guidance was provided.
This was compounded by the fact that all other chiropractic colleges required its students to be enrolled in their chiropractic program a minimum of one year before being eligible to graduate. This meant that the hundreds of students like myself who were just weeks or months from graduation were forced to finance an expensive relocation to another state, often forfeiting security deposits, and then pay tuition and living expenses for a minimum of one additional year before becoming eligible to graduate.
Throughout this ordeal, CCE never acknowledged the damage it caused or offered assistance to the students its decision affected. In my case, the costs of an additional year of tuition plus the relocation and living expenses had to be financed by student loans that will take many years to repay. Most regrettably, in some cases the disruption was too much for some students to handle and they left the profession permanently, tens of thousands of dollars in debt.
I have reviewed the January 22, 2003 affidavit of Sherman L. Cohn1 concerning CCE’s accreditation action, studied the February 10, 2003 court decision of Federal Judge Charles E. Moye, Jr.,2 and read newspaper articles detailing the July 5, 2005 findings of the USDE citing CCE for multiple violations.3 It appears after assessing these documents that CCE’s actions that needlessly devastated the lives of so many innocent individuals were negligent, politically motivated, in violation of USDE criteria, and outside the standard practice of accreditors. Sherman L. Cohn, Professor of Law at Georgetown University is considered one of the country’s foremost accreditation experts. After reviewing all correspondence and documents between CCE and LUCC relevant to the accreditation decision, Mr. Cohn attested to the following conclusion in a meticulously detailed 14-page affidavit submitted to the Federal Court:... it is my opinion that applying the standards that accreditors have developed and apply from one discipline to another, the materials before the [CCE’s] COA on June 7, 2002, did not warrant a revocation of [LUCC] accreditation. Moreover, it is my opinion that revoking accreditation in this situation is outside the standards and expected practice of accreditors.1 Federal Judge Charles E. Moye, Jr. of the United States District Court is perhaps the only individual to have reviewed all documentation and heard testimony from both sides concerning CCE’s accreditation decision. After reviewing all evidence and testimony Judge Moye ordered CCE to restore LUCC’s accreditation. In his decision Judge Moye stated the following: ...the Court finds that Plaintiff [LUCC] has demonstrated that it is substantially likely to succeed on the merits for the following reasons: Although decisions of accrediting agencies have historically been given deference, where, as here, accreditation decisions are made by actors with a financial interest in the outcome, little deference should be given. Here, there were admitted conflicting economic financial interests in the decisions that were made. That fact is shown by the recruitment of Life students, after the June 2002 decision, by competitors whose representatives were involved in the decisionmaking on accreditation; an attempt by a competitor whose representative was one of the decisionmakers to buy Life University after its accreditation was withdrawn, at a time when the monetary value of Life University had been reduced by the accreditation decision; the fact that persons with competing financial interests to those of Life University made the accreditation decisions on Life University; the fact that the elimination of Life University as a chiropractic college would increase the number of students and money available to those competitors; that an aggressive group of leaders of the eight liberal chiropractic schools, who had only one-third of the chiropractic students, had undertaken a series of corporate manipulations in order to reduce the representation and dominance of the eight conservative chiropractic schools (of which Life University was one), who had approximately two-thirds of all chiropractic students; that these corporate manipulations, which may very well have violated CCE’s corporate charter, were calculated to give dominance to the liberal minority group over the conservative majority group; that the end result has been the disaccreditation of the largest of all the colleges of chiropractic and the turning loose of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of students to be attracted to the other schools. Actions which would violate the antitrust laws if incorporated in an accreditation procedure, per se, indicate a lack of due process.2
The USDE, having received a complaint against CCE for various violations relating to its accreditation decision subsequently cited CCE for violations of the Secretary’s Criteria for Recognition. The violations included findings that:1. CCE was not in compliance with criterion addressing allegations of conflicts of interest by its members, commissioners, and evaluation team members despite having received a letter of complaint. USDE concluded that either CCE does not have clear and effective controls against conflict of interest or has failed to implement such controls where appropriate. USDE ordered CCE to investigate the allegation of conflicts of interest by its members, commissioners, and evaluation team members in its review of LUCC. 2. CCE was not in compliance with criterion to ensure consistency in decision-making. USDE concluded that CCE’s accreditation action restoring LUCC accreditation represented an inconsistent application of agency standards.3. CCE was not in compliance with criterion requiring disclosure of the names, professional qualifications, and employment and organizational affiliations of the members of its decision-making bodies that were involved in the LUCC accreditation decision. In addition, CCE did not review itself in a timely and fair manner and apply unbiased judgment to a complaint against itself. 4. CCE was not in compliance with criterion mandating separate and independent criteria for accrediting agencies. USDE ordered CCE to revise its policies pertaining to the election of its commissioners such that the CCE Board of Directors cannot serve as officers or board members of any related, associated, or affiliated trade association or membership organization to include the Association of Chiropractic Colleges. Rather than accept responsibility for its negligent actions and acknowledge the harm it has caused, CCE instead appears content to provide public statements about its professionalism and offer public denials of the violations for which it was cited. Dr. Joseph Brimhall, in his role as former chairman of CCE’s Commission on Accreditation, stated in an official CCE article dated November 8, 2002 that CCE’s decision concerning LUCC was made with “deep consideration of the consequences to the students and the public.”4 In reality, no tangible efforts were made to reduce the consequences to the students. To the contrary, according to Judge Moye, CCE members from competing schools that were involved in the decision to revoke LUCC’s accreditation were subsequently implicit in the recruitment of LUCC students. Further, after USDE cited CCE for violations on July 5, 2005, Dr. Brimhall in his current role as CCE President sent out a CCE Press Release dated November 10, 2005 stating, “CCE has not been cited for non-compliance by USDE for any accreditation decisions.”5
Regardless of CCE’s public statements of denial, it is undeniable that CCE was in violation of USDE criteria when it revoked LUCC’s accreditation on June 10, 2002. This action demonstrated a reckless disregard for the economic futures, professional futures, and personal and family lives of hundreds of LUCC students and has caused irreparable harm. After causing this harm, CCE restored LUCC’s accreditation on August 21, 2003, once again in violation of USDE criteria, effectively rendering the devastating hardships it caused senseless. Despite attestations of CCE failings by accreditation experts, federal court rulings overturning CCE decisions, and violations of USDE criteria, CCE continues to place into its top leadership positions individuals that were directly involved in inappropriate accreditation decisions and inappropriate public statements. This demonstrates that CCE is incapable of effectuating necessary changes to place its house in order.
I request that the USDE terminate CCE’s recognition based on its history of multiple USDE violations, failures to acknowledge the damage it has caused, and its continued public statements of denial. CCE has abused its power and failed in its responsibility to the students and public it serves.
Sincerely,
Jennifer L. Zingone, D.C.
References
1 -Affidavit of Sherman L. Cohn, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center; 1/22/03
2 -United States District Court, Order On Plaintiff’s Motion For Preliminary Injunction LUCC v. CCE, 2/10/03
3 -Letter form USDE to CCE dated July 5, 2005, The Chiropractic Choice, 2/06
4 -Philips RB, Brimhall J: An open letter to the chiropractic profession from the CCE, 11/8/02
5 Brimhall J: CCE Press Release, 11/10/05
