Regulatory Compliance Monitoring Paradigms and the Relationship of Regulatory Compliance/Licensing with Program Quality: A Policy Commentary




regulatory compliance, program monitoring, licensing, program quality


This policy commentary deals with two key issues within regulatory science related to the best methods for measuring regulatory compliance: Program monitoring paradigms and the relationship of regulatory compliance/licensing with program quality. Examples from program monitoring paradigms include: 1) Substantial versus Monolithic. 2) Differential Monitoring versus One size fits all monitoring. 3) “Not all standards are created equal” versus “All standards are created equal”. 4) “Do things well” versus “Do no harm”. 5) Strength based versus Deficit based. 6) Formative versus Summative. 7) Program Quality versus Program Compliance. 8) 100-0 scoring versus 100 or 0 scoring. 9) QRIS versus Licensing. 10) Non-Linear versus Linear. Examples from the relationship of regulatory compliance/licensing with program quality include: 1) “Do no harm” versus “Do good”. 2) Closed system versus Open system. 3) Rules versus Indicators. 4) Nominal versus Ordinal measurement. 5) Full versus Partial compliance. 6) Ceiling effect versus No Ceiling effect. 7) Gatekeeper versus Enabler. 8) Risk versus Performance.

Author Biography

Richard John Fiene, Penn State University

Affiliate Professor/Professor of Psychology (ret)

Prevention Research Center

Penn State University


Fiene, R. (2019). A treatise on Regulatory Compliance. Journal of Regulatory Science, Volume 7, 2019.



2022-05-26 — Updated on 2022-05-26




Policy Commentaries

Most read articles by the same author(s)