We have seen the recent vlog by Chris Wagner and NAD.
That perspective helped us realize that the systems in place for communication about certification between our organizations are not as solid as we thought. From the vlog we see they are not sufficient – we need a better checks and balance to ensure the communication flow is sufficient in providing consistent information to both organizations.
The current system is this.
NAD appoints individuals of its own choosing to serve on the Certification Committee. RID appoints individuals of its own choosing to serve on the Certification Committee (CC). Currently, NAD has two members—one of whom has been the Chair of the CC for the past six years. RID has 4 (four) members. And there is one independent member.
As well, each organization has a Board Liaison. NAD’s board liaison is President Chris Wagner. RID’s board liaison is Vice President Melvin Walker. In addition, RID also has a staff liaison assigned to the Certification Committee. From time to time, NAD Executive Director, Howard Rosenblum, has attended committee meetings as an NAD staff person.
The Certification Committee has a standard schedule for its meetings—the first Monday of each month, unless otherwise planned. That meeting is open to the committee members, the board liaisons and the staff liaisons. The committee does not hold meetings that are closed to any of these individuals.
From our perspective, we thought this system was working well. The board liaison, Vice President Walker, regularly and consistently brings to the board the recommendations or requests of the Certification Committee. As well, the RID staff has first-hand information from those meetings that impact policy and test administration.
However, while this arrangement has been working for RID, we have come to realize that it is not working for NAD.Therefore, there is a need to revisit the system to see how to make it more functional and satisfactory for both organizations. What works for RID may not be what works for NAD so to be respectful of their role in this collaboration, we need to look at the communication system in place to assure all parties are fully informed and engaged.
We [President Whitcher and IED Witter-Merithew] recently met with Chris and Howard as a result of the vlog and the information they shared.
We respect their perspective that RID has not been as direct and consistent in our messaging to and with NAD leadership as they desire. Over the past months, the RID board and HQ have been focused on managing and addressing a number of transitions happening within the organization and the need to focus on the much delayed planning of the NOLA conference. We need to create a reciprocal system of maintaining ongoing and consistent communication on our shared agenda and activities.
The meeting with Chris and Howard resulted in a renewed commitment to work together and reviewed the steps that led to the decision for the moratorium.
Working together – what does that mean?
NAD agreed to identify and notify RID of the NAD reps to engage in the Risk Assessment. RID’s IED invited NAD to participate in this process during a f2f meeting with NAD’s ED in June. RID looks forward to their reps being engaged in the eight (8) weeks that remain before the report is due to the board on November 1. NAD will identify stakeholders with experience and understanding of certification – people with experience to identify possible business models for collaborative certification administration. We await their notification.
We look forward to working with them and continuing our partnership together.
In terms of the recent decision regarding the moratorium, the steps leading to this decision are important to reiterate. I recommend that you take the time to review the recently released vlog by Vice President Melvin Walker regarding the rationale and reason for the moratorium. This provides you the background and recommendations from the Certification Committee as well as the decision-making process for the RID Board of Directors.
As we understand, NAD’s primary issue with RID’s decision is the inclusion of the NIC in the moratorium and the implications for stakeholders, particularly in states with licensure that specifies RID certification. We respect their concern, understand it, and come at the issue from a different perspective.
As indicated in NAD President Wagner’s vlog, NAD does not perceive itself as being involved with or responsible for the administration or liabilities of the NIC or any RID test—this includes the cost of ongoing maintenance. From RID’s perspective, since RID therefore assumes100% of the cost of test development, maintenance and administration, and up to this point, 100% of the liability of the NIC, it holds the fiduciary duty to make the decision about viability, maintainability and sustainability. There is no business agreement between NAD and RID upon which to otherwise guide such decision-making.
Further, from RID’s perspective, NAD has been involved at the level of decision-making within the Certification Committee regarding all of RID’s tests, including the CDI, SC:L and OTC. The NAD appointees to the CC—including the CC chair—have never removed themselves from discussions during portions of the CC agenda where certificates other than the NIC have been discussed. Their representatives have actively engaged in discussion about all of the certifications administered by RID, and whereas their appointee serves as the Chair of the CC, she leads discussions and decision-making regarding all the exams, within the limitations of authority granted to the board appointed committee. And the RID Board’s decision regarding a moratorium flows from the CC’s recommendation to the board.
Thank you for your attention to this vlog. We felt it important that our members, and all stakeholders, had RID’s perspective on these matters as part of the sources you rely upon for understanding this complex situation. We look forward to our continued work with NAD and to sharing further information with you in the coming weeks. Please continue to let us know your remaining questions. We will do our best to be responsive.