Inside Behavior Analysis
Volume 1 | 2009 | Number 1
Organizational Review Committee Update
By Jay Moore
The Organizational Review Committee consists of three persons: Jay Moore (chair), Dave Wilder, and Jenn Austin. The Committee carries out two functions. The first is to review applications for organizational membership to ABAI and make recommendations to the ABAI Executive Council regarding the applications. The second is to review applications for exhibitor and advertising at ABAI conventions, including the main convention in May and other focused conventions (e.g., on autism).
Regarding organizational membership, most applications come from service providers in the area of DDA. The ABAI criteria ask for BACB certification of at least one member of the staff, status as ABAI full member of at least one member of the staff, and consistency with ABAI mission. Applications typically come in with accompanying verbal material and reference to a Web site.
Many applications come from agencies delivering custodial or rehabilitative services or organizations that provide material or support services. A recent development concerns Web sites that charge subscription fees for various services, such as access to literature (reports, descriptions of intervention protocols), data base services, or on-line implementation of intervention protocols.
It is not necessary that the agency or organization be 100% behavior analytic. It is only necessary that at least one staff member satisfy the criteria. However, organizational members, exhibitors, and advertisers cannot indicate in their promotional material that by virtue of their status their services or programs have been "endorsed" by ABAI.
In light of the importance of professional services based on behavior analytic principles and the likelihood of reaching important consumers, prospective exhibitors or advertisers seem to be placing great significance on approval. However, occasionally, the information submitted is only fragmentary. As an example, an agency or service might refer us to their Web site, but the Web site is incomplete. In such a case, we really have no basis for a review and don't believe we should approve some applicants based on a promise, even though the ad or exhibit says all the right things and uses all the right words. In our opinion, it would be premature to approve such applicants. We believe that potential consumers would be upset if they go to a Web site we have approved to advertise and exhibit only to find that the Web site is not yet functional. The negative publicity would ultimately be troublesome for us, as it might damage our credibility as a source of information. Accordingly, we do not approve such organizations. We make every effort to communicate our concerns in these cases. Again, we do not try to be gatekeepers. Rather, we try to look at things from the point of view of potential consumers.