2013 Annual Updates The New Online Gateway to the California Community Colleges

CCCApply Annual Updates - Timeline 2013 – 2014 Schedule Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Accept and evaluate requests Draft specifications Finalize specifications Program changes Develop test plan Develop messaging to users TEST changes Program corrections Implement messaging to users Validate and sign-off changes Go LIVE 4/5 Plan next year’s enhancements — —>

CCCApply.Org New CCCApply Website www.cccapply.org New, streamlined look and feel Representative of diverse populations Easy access to college Admissions pages Easy access to support / help Manage the transition to new application CCCApply.Org

Changes to VISA Types and Corresponding Algorithms Problem: Currently, the online application has several issues pertaining to VISA types that also affect residency algorithms. VISA type “Other or None” causing errors and confusion VISA type “X” is not a valid VISA type Lettered VISAs are defined incorrectly Errors in AB540 algorithm logic regarding nonimmigrant VISAs AB540 algorithm returning faulty eligibility information Why are VISA types important? Affect preliminary residency determination Affect eligibility for financial aid and fee waivers What algorithms are affected? Residency algorithm AB540 Waiver algorithm Note: There are 4 slides pertaining to VISA and Algorithm changes (approved for Xap and OpenCCCApply). I’ve summarized them in the first two, and discussed solutions in the next two. Problem: Currently, the online application to college has several errors relative to VISA types that also affect related algorithms. In order to determine preliminary residency status, non-Citizen applicants must provide additional information about their VISA type, if available, which may determine their eligibility for non-resident fee waiver. Issues with VISA types that affect the application: 1) Change VISA type “Other or None” to “OTHER” 2) Remove VISA type X – No such VISA type. Change VISA Type “Other or None” to “OTHER” Problem Statement Currently, an applicant can select [VisaType = ‘Other or None’] and not check ‘No documents’, leaving no clear indication of whether they have a Visa or not. Since we added the ‘No documents’ checkbox in the Citizenship section of the Residency 1 page, there is no need for the Visa Types menu to provide an option for ‘None’; therefore, the Steering Committee would like to change the VISA Type option from ‘Other or None’ to ‘Other’. With this change, it will be possible to distinguish applicants who have a Visa that is not on the menu from applicants who do not have a VISA or other documentation, a benefit in CCCApply algorithms and for colleges interpreting the Citizenship data. Problem with AB540 Algorithm (relative to all lettered VISA types = null) Currently, the section of the AB 540 Algorithm that deals with holders of nonimmigrant visas is incorrect, with some but not all Visa Types being considered nonimmigrant. Further investigation has shown that all lettered visas (i.e., all options in the Visa Types menu) are nonimmigrant visas. The AB 540 Algorithm needs to be corrected to match the proper definition of nonimmigrant visas. Steering Committee Review: APPROVED for Xap and new CCCApply

Changes to VISA Types and Corresponding Algorithms Change VISA Type “Other or None” to “OTHER” Currently applicants can choose VISA type “other or none” and not check the “no documents” checkbox in the Citizenship section of the application. Ambiguous: Unable to distinguish whether they have a VISA or not. Redundant: “No Documents” checkbox included in error logic Inefficient: Creates unnecessary work for Admissions Remove VISA Type “X” Officially, there is no VISA type X. Apparently in the past, our listing of X was used to identify an Employment Authorization Document Card (EAD). Employment card types should not be included in the VISA types listing. Issues with VISA types that affect the application: 1) Change VISA type “Other or None” to “OTHER” 2) Remove VISA type X – No such VISA type. Change VISA Type “Other or None” to “OTHER” Problem Statement Currently, an applicant can select [VisaType = ‘Other or None’] and not check ‘No documents’, leaving no clear indication of whether they have a Visa or not. Since we added the ‘No documents’ checkbox in the Citizenship section of the Residency 1 page, there is no need for the Visa Types menu to provide an option for ‘None’; therefore, the Steering Committee would like to change the VISA Type option from ‘Other or None’ to ‘Other’. With this change, it will be possible to distinguish applicants who have a Visa that is not on the menu from applicants who do not have a VISA or other documentation, a benefit in CCCApply algorithms and for colleges interpreting the Citizenship data. Problem Statement There is no ‘X’ Visa. Our listing of ‘X’ in the Visa Types menu derives from a document that identifies ‘X’ as “Employment Authorization Card (X created in alpha SBC).” I think this meant that an Employment Authorization Document/Card (EAD) should be coded as ‘X’. However, an EAD is not a Visa, but a supplementary document that a Visa holder or registered alien might hold. Since we would want to know the primary status, there’s no reason to include the EAD in the Visa Types. Problem with AB540 Algorithm (relative to all lettered VISA types = null) Currently, the section of the AB 540 Algorithm that deals with holders of nonimmigrant visas is incorrect, with some but not all Visa Types being considered nonimmigrant. Further investigation has shown that all lettered visas (i.e., all options in the Visa Types menu) are nonimmigrant visas. The AB 540 Algorithm needs to be corrected to match the proper definition of nonimmigrant visas. Steering Committee Review: APPROVED for Xap and new CCCApply

Changes made to VISA types listing. Changes Regarding VISA Types and Corresponding Algorithms Solution Change VISA type “Other or None” to “OTHER” Eliminates confusion and potential for errors Applicants must choose a VISA type (including Other) or check the “No Documents” box Correct the error checking between visaType and noDocuments Remove VISA Type “X” Remove any potential confusion AB540 Algorithm Correction - Solution Request Change the AB 540 Algorithm so that any applicant who holds a lettered visa (i.e., for whom the Visa Type is not null) is disqualified. VISA “Other or NONE” to “Other” Change the definition of Visa Type = OTHR from ‘Other or None’ to ‘Other’. Modify error checking as appropriate for this change in definition. Changes made to VISA types listing. Final Determination: APPROVED for Xap and New CCCApply

Solution Final Determination: APPROVED for Xap and New CCCApply Changes Regarding VISA Types and Affected Algorithms Solution Correct the AB540 algorithm logic: All lettered VISAs will be considered non-immigrant VISAs Holders of lettered VISAs will not be eligible for fee waiver New Logic: If Visa Type is not null = then applicants is disqualified Correct AB540 eligibility information, links and descriptions Properly identifies eligible fee waiver applicants AB540 Algorithm Correction - Solution Request Change the AB 540 Algorithm so that any applicant who holds a lettered visa (i.e., for whom the Visa Type is not null) is disqualified. VISA “Other or NONE” to “Other” Change the definition of Visa Type = OTHR from ‘Other or None’ to ‘Other’. Modify error checking as appropriate for this change in definition. Note: This change to the definition of ‘OTHR’ should affect the AB540 algorithm, but that algorithm is currently incorrect in the way it handles Visa Types, so correction of the AB540 algorithm will be dealt with separately, and not included in this Change Specification. Final Determination: APPROVED for Xap and New CCCApply

Residency Clarification for Distance Learners Residing Outside of California Problem: The residency question: “When did your stay in California begin?” does not provide a clear option for distance education students who reside outside of California. Why is this a problem? Distance education in California is growing! In 1995, 0.63 percent of all course sessions were considered distance education. By 2011, number grew to 9.06% DE students aren’t relocating to California More work for Admissions Problem Statement Further clarification is needed on the application to college for distance education students residing outside of California relative to "when their stay in California begins". "In Coastline’s Military/CE program, we frequently encounter students who are still “caught up” on the residency question that asks “When did your present stay in California begin?” Since many of our students do not reside in California and have no intention of relocating here, they still have some problems with this question. The checkbox that was added a few years back (“Check if not yet arrived in California”) has certainly helped, but with the number of out-of-state distance learners that many of our schools are encountering, it may be beneficial to change the language in the textbox to: “I have not yet arrived in California or I do not plan to relocate to California” (or something similar). It would be helpful if the FAQs page could be updated in the interim to address this." Solution Request Steering Committee had a discussion as to whether to add a new question - "Do you currently live in California" as a preliminary question? How would this question affect the residency algorithm and/or other fields in the application? Solution Notes: Finding: The field notCAResident is not used in residency directly. In the Data Dictionary it claims to be used in Table B, however it is not referenced in the algorithm. There should be no problem in modifying the language of the question to include out of state distance learners. Steering Committee Review: APPROVED for Xap and New CCCApply

Modify the question to include out-of-state distance learners Residency Clarification for Distance Learners Residing Outside of California Solution Modify the question to include distance education learners: “Check if not yet arrived in California or do not plan to relocate to California.” Modify the question to include out-of-state distance learners Solution Request Steering Committee had a discussion as to whether to add a new question - "Do you currently live in California" as a preliminary question? How would this question affect the residency algorithm and/or other fields in the application? Solution Notes: Finding: The field notCAResident is not used in residency directly. In the Data Dictionary it claims to be used in Table B, however it is not referenced in the algorithm. There should be no problem in modifying the language of the question to include out of state distance learners. The field notCAResident is not used in residency algorithm directly. There should be no problem in modifying the language of the question. Final Determination: APPROVED for Xap and New CCCApply

AB 2478: Change to Recently Discharged Military Act Problem: Per recent legislation (effective January 2013), the residency requirements for honorably discharged military have been extended from one year to two years to establish residency. New Law: Provides for a one year exemption within a two year period Restricted to an “Honorable Discharge” Stationed in California one year immediately prior to discharge If student leaves and returns to CA within the first year, they may file an Intent to Establish Residency affidavit and claim one year exemption. Problem Statement Per Legislative Mandate - the residency requirements for discharged military has been extended from one year to two years to establish residency. AB2478: Recently Discharged Military: Act to amend Section 68075.5 of the Education Code, relating to public postsecondary education. Change to Residency-Veteran's Code of This bill instead would make those students exempt from paying nonresident tuition, and would revise that provision for purposes of the California Community Colleges by making a community college student who was a member of the Armed Forces of the United States stationed in this state on active duty for more than one year immediately prior to being discharged from the Armed Forces exempt from paying nonresident tuition for up to one year, to be used while he or she lives in this state and within two years of being discharged, if he or she files an affidavit with the community college stating that he or she intends to establish residency in California as soon as possible, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would prohibit a former member of the Armed Forces of the United States who received a specified discharge from being eligible for an exemption. Solution Request Steering Committee voted to approve adding a question to both Xap and OpenCCCApply applications to determine Type of Discharge. Solution Notes: Allows for a one year exemption within a two year period following an honorable discharge from the military after being stationed in California for one year immediately prior. If student leaves and returns to CA within the first year, they may file an Intent to Establish Residency affidavit and claim one year exemption. Other than the Type of Discharge, CCCApply currently provides all information necessary for A&R to make a determination. Specifications Add the field “Type of discharge (if applicable):” to the U.S. Military / Dependant of Military Status group. Steering Committee Review: APPROVED for Xap and new CCCApply

AB 2478: Change to Recently Discharged Military Act Solution Solution: Add “Type of Discharge” question If student leaves and returns within 1 year, files an affidavit for one year extension Other than ascertaining type of discharge, CCCApply currently provides all information necessary for A&R to make a determination. Problem Statement Per Legislative Mandate - the residency requirements for discharged military has been extended from one year to two years to establish residency. AB2478: Recently Discharged Military: Act to amend Section 68075.5 of the Education Code, relating to public postsecondary education. Change to Residency-Veteran's Code of This bill instead would make those students exempt from paying nonresident tuition, and would revise that provision for purposes of the California Community Colleges by making a community college student who was a member of the Armed Forces of the United States stationed in this state on active duty for more than one year immediately prior to being discharged from the Armed Forces exempt from paying nonresident tuition for up to one year, to be used while he or she lives in this state and within two years of being discharged, if he or she files an affidavit with the community college stating that he or she intends to establish residency in California as soon as possible, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would prohibit a former member of the Armed Forces of the United States who received a specified discharge from being eligible for an exemption. Solution Request Steering Committee voted to approve adding a question to both Xap and OpenCCCApply applications to determine Type of Discharge. Solution Notes: Allows for a one year exemption within a two year period following an honorable discharge from the military after being stationed in California for one year immediately prior. If student leaves and returns to CA within the first year, they may file an Intent to Establish Residency affidavit and claim one year exemption. Other than the Type of Discharge, CCCApply currently provides all information necessary for A&R to make a determination. Specifications Add the field “Type of discharge (if applicable):” to the U.S. Military / Dependant of Military Status group. Final Determination: APPROVED in new CCCApply DECLINED in Xap due to cost

AB 2171: Disclosure of Prior Expulsion from a California Community College Problem: AB 2171 allows California Community College districts to require applicants to disclose any prior expulsion from another college or university and allows denial of admission for specified serious or violent offenses. The Law: District has authorization to deny or permit Expulsion - or going through expulsion - within past 5 years Board must hold hearing before taking action to determine risk or threat District can request info, and must provide info, by another CCC Problem Statement AB 2171 - Allows California Community College districts to require student applicants to disclose any prior expulsion from another community college and allows denial of admission for specified serious or violent offenses. AB 2171 Summary: This bill would authorize the governing board of a district to either deny enrollment, permit enrollment, or permit conditional enrollment to any individual who has been expelled from a community college within the preceding 5 years, or who is, at the time of the application, undergoing expulsion procedures, for certain offenses, as provided, if the board determines that the person continues to pose a risk to the safety of others. This bill would require the board or a delegate to hold a hearing, before taking action to deny enrollment or permit conditional enrollment, to determine whether the person continues to pose a risk. The bill would authorize a governing board of a district to delegate its authority under these provisions to the superintendent or president of the district, or to his or her designee. [Existing law authorizes the governing board of a district to expel a student for good cause when the presence of the student causes a continuing danger to the physical safety of the student or others. Existing law requires that the expulsion be accompanied by a hearing.] The bill also would authorize the community college district to request information, and respond to a request for information, from another community college district to determine whether an applicant continues to pose a danger to the physical safety of others. The bill would authorize a community college district to require these applicants to inform the district of his or her prior expulsion, and to consider failure to do so in determining whether to grant admission. The bill would expressly apply specified immunities to an exercise of discretion by a community college district, and its officers and employees, under these provisions. The bill would not apply these provisions to the admission of students for whom a community college district has discretion to admit pursuant to specified law. Steering Committee Review: APPROVED for Xap and new CCCApply

AB 2171: Disclosure of Prior Expulsion from a California Community College Review Steering Committee Approved adding an optional / self-reported question to the application asking the student to self-disclose any expulsion(s) within past 5 years. Xap Solution: Checkbox under each college or university; Add new data fields (corresponding to each college or university). Changes downloads New CCCApply Solution: Conditional Questioning – streamline display One data field / Summary flag –simplify logic Requests: Minimal impact to application Yield just enough info to determine eligibility Emphasize “self-reporting” / “self-disclosure” AB 2171: Disclosure of Prior Expulsion from a CCC Solution Request Steering Committee voted to approve adding an optional / self-reported question to the CCCApply application(s) asking student to self-disclose if they have been expelled from a California Community College in the past five years, or if they are currently undergoing expulsion procedures from a CCC. The question will be placed so as to yield adequate information for the College or District to determine enrollment eligibility with minimal changes to the application(s). New CCCApply: To simplify the logic, a checkbox indicating expulsion status will be added to each listed college, regardless as to if it is a CCC or not. A summary flag will be set if the user indicates that he/she has been expelled from any listed college/university. It is intended that a college could download this one summary flag and if set True, could investigate further. “collegeExpelledStatusFlag” To simplify the logic, a checkbox indicating expulsion status will be added to each listed college, regardless as to if it is a CCC or not. A summary flag will be set if the user indicates that he/she has been expelled from any listed college/university. It is intended that a college could download this one summary flag and if set True, could investigate further. In the Xap CCCApply system, a checkbox, “Check here if you were expelled, or are you in the process of expulsion procedures.” is to be added to the Education page under Colleges Attended section, for each college attended. This question would appear under each instance (Colleges attended 1 – 4) that appears on the application – regardless if the college or university is a California Community College. Final Determination: APPROVED in new CCCApply DECLINED in Xap due to cost

Solution Implemented Solution: AB 2171: Disclosure of Prior Expulsion from a California Community College Solution Final determination: Steering Committee DECLINED changes to Xap application due to cost. Implemented Solution: New CCCApply Application only Using “Conditional Questioning” format – Application remains clean, streamline display To simplify logic, add one data field / Summary flag: “collegeExpelledStatusFlag” AB 2171: Disclosure of Prior Expulsion from a CCC Solution Request Steering Committee voted to approve adding an optional / self-reported question to the CCCApply application(s) asking student to self-disclose if they have been expelled from a California Community College in the past five years, or if they are currently undergoing expulsion procedures from a CCC. The question will be placed so as to yield adequate information for the College or District to determine enrollment eligibility with minimal changes to the application(s). To simplify the logic, a checkbox indicating expulsion status will be added to each listed college, regardless as to if it is a CCC or not. A summary flag will be set if the user indicates that he/she has been expelled from any listed college/university. It is intended that a college could download this one summary flag and if set True, could investigate further. In the Xap CCCApply system, a checkbox, “Check here if you were expelled, or are you in the process of expulsion procedures.” is to be added to the Education page under Colleges Attended section, for each college attended. This question would appear under each instance (Colleges attended 1 – 4) that appears on the application – regardless if the college or university is a California Community College. Final Determination: APPROVED in new CCCApply DECLINED in Xap due to cost

Clarify Education Section for K8 Applicants and Modify Error Checking for High School Graduation Date Problem: Eighth graders (>13 years old) are confused by the choices in the Education section; Students end up selecting answers that generate error messages; Omit answers because they don’t believe they pertain to them; Error checking not allowing enough years for them to graduate According to Saddleback College, 8th graders applying for summer classes are confused by the choices in the education section of the online application and end up selecting answers that generate errors, or omitting answers because they don’t think it applies to them. The list below shows an example of what an 8th grade student selects when applying: “Enrolling in high school (or lower grade) and college at the same time” for both “Entry Level” and “High School Education”, “did not attend high school” in the last high school attended section (I don’t think this applies to them.) High school completion date of 2016. Currently, CCCApply will not allow the year 2016 and will generate an error until the date is either removed or changed to a date up to and including 2015. This causes the user to be untruthful in their answer. Part of SC discussion: Change error check so that high school completion date is required for concurrent students and year may be up to 6 years in future Change error check so that high school completion date is required for concurrent students and year may be up to 6 years in future Steering Committee Review: APPROVED for Xap and New CCCApply

Steering Committee Review: APPROVED for Xap and New CCCApply Clarify Education Section for K8 and Modify Error Checking of High School Grad Date With no other options, K8 students are compelled to either answer untruthfully Example Or not answer at all. Either way, contradicting answers create errors These are examples of how students are answering these questions now – how they could be confused, etc. Steering Committee Review: APPROVED for Xap and New CCCApply

Clarify Education Section for K8 and Modify Error Checking of High School Grad Date Solution: Modify question in High School Education section: High school completion date (the date you graduated, or are planning to graduate if in K-12, passed the GED, or received a certificate of high school equivalence. If unsure of the exact day, please estimate) High school completion date (the date you graduated, or are planning to graduate if in K-12, passed the GED, or received a certificate of high school equivalence. If unsure of the exact date, please estimate: Or not answer at all. Either way, contradicting answers create errors Modify the question to include an option for pre-high school aged applicants (>13 yrs). SOLUTION 1 of 3 Replace text in the High School Education section High school completion date (the date you graduated, or are planning to graduate if in K-12, passed the GED, or received a certificate of high school equivalence. If unsure of the exact day, please estimate) Final Determination: APPROVED in new CCCApply DECLINED in Xap due to cost

Clarify Education Section for K8 and Modify Error Checking of High School Grad Date Solution: In Last High School Attended section, re-order list of options in drop down menu. If you graduated from high school, identify the high school from which you graduated. If you did not graduate from high school, identify the last high school you attended. If you are in grades K-8, please select the high school you plan to attend. If you did not attend high school at all, check “Did not attend High School”. Solution 2 of 3 Reorder the list from the drop down menu: Last High School Attended If you graduated from high school, identify the high school from which you graduated. If you did not graduate from high school, identify the last high school you attended. If you are in grades K-8, please select the high school you plan to attend. If you did not attend high school at all, check “Did not attend High School”. Final Determination: APPROVED in new CCCApply DECLINED in Xap due to cost

Clarify Education Section for K8 and Modify Error Checking of High School Grad Date Solution: Modify error checking so that high school completion date is required and may be six (6) years in the future. High school completion date (the date you graduated, or are planning to graduate, from high school, passed the GED, or received a certificate of high school equivalency. If unsure of the exact date, please estimate: Or not answer at all. Either way, contradicting answers create errors Solution 3 of 3: Error Check Change error check so that high school completion date is required for concurrent students and year may be up to 6 years in future. If (highSchoolEdLevel = “1”) THEN highSchoolCompletionDate IS REQUIRED If High School Education Level is “1 - Will be enrolled in college and high school (or lower grades) at the same time,” High School Completion Date may be between Start of Term and 6 years after Start of Term, or blank. If more than 6 years, result is error message, “For the level of high education stated, high school completion date cannot be more than 6 years after start of term; please correct the date.” Require high school completion date for concurrent students and Extend estimated completion date to 6 years in to the future. Final Determination: APPROVED in new CCCApply DECLINED in Xap due to cost

Change Descriptive Text for Residency Status 2 Question: Should the description used for Residency Status 2 be changed ? The words “proof needed” imply that no proof is needed if the Residency Status is 1. Preliminary Residency Status Potential Resident, proof needed (code 2) Solution: Change the header to “Preliminary Residency Status” There’s only one slide for this change. Problem Statement It contradicts the legal requirement for colleges to verify residency for all students. By classifying some applicants as residents without the need for further verification, it suggests that CCCApply is determining residency rather than calculating a preliminary residency determination. Revise Code 2 text to “Potential Resident, Proof Needed” Final Determination APPROVED for Xap and new CCCApply

Identify Emancipated Minors More Accurately Problem: In the Parent/Guardian Status section of the current application, a question asks if a student under 19 years old is under the ‘care or control’ of their parent/guardian. Misinterpreting the question, many times the student says ‘No’, which flags them as an “emancipated minor” when they are not. A true emancipated minor has documentation for proof A correction form is needed to obtain additional parent information Creates extra paper work for Admissions 2 slides for this one PROBLEM: Currently the application asks if a student is under the ‘care or control’ of their guardian. Many times a student under the age of 19 says ‘No’, which throws out a flag which codes them as an emancipated minor. A truly emancipated minor requires documentation to prove that they are for residency purposes. More often than not, the student is not emancipated, and so we have to get their parent information through the use of a correction form. Is there a way currently (or in the future with Open CCCApply) where we could ask the student a more pointed question or a series of questions that helps them select the correct choice so that we can avoid this extra paperwork?” Solution Request Revise the Parent/Guardian Status section, which identifies emancipated minors, so the applicant is asked whether any of the possible bases for emancipated minor status is true. Flag the applicant as an emancipated minor if the answer is Yes; flag the applicant as under the care and control of parent(s)/guardian(s) if the answer is No. Do not use the phrase ‘care and control’ in the wording of the questions Steering Committee Review: APPROVED for Xap and new CCCApply

Solution Final Determination: APPROVED in Xap and new CCCApply Identify Emancipated Minors More Accurately Solution Modify the wording and reverse the order of the two questions No new data or error logic is needed – but will modify error message accordingly Emancipated: Being emancipated means that you have been legally released from the care and control of parent(s) and/or guardian(s), and are now responsible for your own care and control. To be considered legally emancipated for the purposes of this college application, you must have received a declaration of emancipation from a California court, or have been legally emancipated in another U.S. state. Final Determination: APPROVED in Xap and new CCCApply

Link to Foster Care Help from “Aged Out” and “Emancipated” Problem: The XAP Help text for Foster Care includes definitions for ‘aged out’ and ‘emancipated’; therefore, it makes sense to link from these words to the Help pop-up. Solution: Link instances of “aged out” and “emancipated” on the Foster Youth question to the Foster Youth Help pop-up Only one slide for this change Problem Statement Our current XAP Help text for Foster Care includes definitions for ‘aged out’ and ‘emancipated’; therefore, it makes sense to link from these words to the Help pop-up. Solution Request Add “aged out” and “emancipated” links to the Foster Youth question (A) (all instances) to the Foster Youth Help pop-up (B) Specifications Final Determination APPROVED for Xap and new CCCApply

Update the Per-Unit Tuition in Cost of College FAQ Problem: On July 1, 2012, the per-unit tuition fee for all California Community Colleges was increased to $46/unit. All instances in print and/or online must be updated. Solution: Update all online resources: FAQ on CCCApply.org All Tech Center websites CCCHelp.info (shown here) Only one slide for this change On July 1, 2012, the per-unit tuition fee for all California Community Colleges was increased to $46/unit. All instances in print and/or online must be updated. Solution Request In addition to the “Cost of College FAQ” on the CCCApply.org website, confirm that all additional instances are updated across all Tech Center maintained websites, Help sites, and print materials. Final Determination APPROVED for Xap and new CCCApply

CCCApply Project News & Resources: www.cccapplyproject.org Application Site: http://home.cccapply.org Terry McCune: IT Project Lead mccunete@cccnext.net Patty Donohue: Project Mgr donohuepa@cccnext.net