Questions and Answers
- How will new governance process and structure provide an opportunity for voice by special interest divisions, members working in public schools or other work sites, and scientists?
The special interest divisions; Association committees and boards, such as the Multicultural Issues Board and the Research and Scientific Affairs Committee; and other identified groups of ASHA members will play a vital role in the identification of issues during the development of Association priorities. These groups will be asked formally, on an annual basis, to provide input on issues of concern to the members that can be used during the process for identifying Association priorities. These groups also will be called upon by the Executive Board to generate guidelines, technical reports, position statements, and other products that are consistent with the priorities.
The creation of a caucus system allows Councilors and other members of the Association having like interests (e.g., science, public schools, multicultural issues) to meet together during the Council meeting to discuss issues and resolutions that will affect that interest area. In addition, the voices of these groups can be heard through the following mechanisms, which are unchanged from the existing governance process and structure:
option of creating a special interest division
opportunity to offer a resolution
participation in peer review of documents
presentation at the membership forum
- What if the Executive Board does not ratify a Legislative Council action for reasons other than legal reasons?
As part of the shared governance responsibility and accountability, the Executive Board is duty bound to make every effort to ratify reasonable actions taken by the Legislative Council. The major reason for the Executive Board not to ratify an action approved by the Legislative Council would be that the action was detrimental to the good of the Association or illegal. Because the Executive Board, as part of the Legislative Council, will be able to speak on issues as they are discussed during the Legislative Council meeting, the Council can take any Executive Board member's concerns into account before rendering a decision. If the Executive Board does not ratify the action at a later date, that Board decision should be based on new information that was not available during the Council meeting or on a change in circumstances or legal or financial concerns that makes the action, if ratified, detrimental to the Association.
- How do we assure an appropriate number and representation of audiologists and hearing scientists in the Audiology/Hearing Science Assembly?
Audiologists represent 13% of the current ASHA membership. In 1996, the percentage of audiologists on the Legislative Council was 23% (35 of 150). In 1997, the percentage is 22% (33 of 150). This percentage has been consistent over the past few years. To determine if this is an adequate number of audiologists on the Legislative Council to make decisions related to the audiology profession, the Design Team has recommended that a study be completed of the size and representation on the Legislative Council and Assemblies. If it is determined that having representation by audiologists of only 20%-25% of the Council is insufficient, recommendations will be made to ensure that there is a critical mass of representatives of the audiology profession on the Legislative Council. Currently, 1,834 ASHA members have identified themselves as hearing scientists. There are no data on the number of hearing scientists on the Legislative Council. Such data will be collected as part of the proposed study on size and representation.
- How much will a second meeting of the Legislative Council cost? How will an additional meeting be funded?
It is estimated that an additional meeting will cost approximately $160,000 if held in Washington. If in another city, the additional cost of National Office staff travel may bring the total to $200,000. These figures are based on paying Council member expenses ($1,000) rather than per diem reimbursement. It is intended that the second meeting of the Legislative Council be funded for the first three years by liquidating ASHA "savings" or using ASHA's cash flow. It is acknowledged that this procedure may cause expenses to exceed revenue for those 3 years. The evaluation during the third year should address whether the second face-to-face meeting be continued. Reducing the length of the Legislative Council meeting held during the ASHA convention will result in savings that could be used to cover some of the costs of the second meeting.
- Why maintain the Legislative Council at its current size?
The Legislative Council represents the membership and, as the Association's governing entity representing ASHA's membership, discusses, deliberates, and identifies member and Association priorities based on member needs. There needs to be a sufficient number of members on the Legislative Council so that the diverse needs of the membership are represented. Determining what number is "sufficient" is appropriate for study by a group other than the Design Team and is recommended as part of this plan. In the current plan, Legislative Council members will continue to be elected by ASHA members in each of their respective states. Evaluation of reapportionment, size, and representation in relationship to changes in governance is recommended to be completed by July 1999.
NOTE: This study also will consider including representation on the Legislative Council from other groups such as Special Interest Divisions.
Continue to Appendix G | Return to Table of Contents
|