Hi everyone,
  I was so interested in the discussion thread last
month that I emailed the National Commission for
Certifying Agencies (NCCA) after reading the following
message from Sherill:

> [E]ducational curricula are not and cannot be a
basis for professional certification - that's made
very clear in the National Commission for Certifying
Agencies' standards.  Here (again) is the url where
you can download the NCCA's standards:

http://www.noca.org/ncca/accreditation.htm

I really really recommend this document to anyone
who's interested in the ARC situation in particular,
professional certification in general, and/or the
difference between apples and oranges.<

And here's the reply I've received from NCCA after my
query:

Dear Miss (        ):

The NCCA received your request for additional
information regarding Standard 2, Essential Element D
of the NCCA Standards for Accreditation.  The
commissioners view a governing body primarily
consisting of educators/school owners as creating a
very real potential for a conflict of interest.<

  How exactly does this mesh with the statement on
ARC's website that they are "in compliance with NCCA
requirements at this time"?

(Question 28 below.)
http://www.aromatherapycouncil.org/faq.html

  How many people are on ARC's board that *aren't*
teachers/educators- just Trish? And who is on the ARC
board and advisory board anyway? (It should be public
information, but I don't see it on their site.)

NCCA continues with:

>If [a program] chooses to submit an application with
that structure in place, the Commission advises that
[it] provide arguments as to why it would not present
a conflict of interest and evidence of steps the
program has taken to respond to the perception of a
conflict.<