Call to close largest college accreditation agency

The United States Department of Education has recommended that the largest national accreditation agency be stripped of its power as gatekeeper of billions of dollars of financial federal aid for independent colleges, a move that would shake up for-profit higher education.

The call comes after more than a year of criticism of the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools, or ACICS, fuelled by the poor record on student outcomes of some of its member colleges and allegations of misconduct at some of those institutions.

An independent advisory board will consider the Department of Education’s recommendation when it decides ACICS’ fate next week and will make its own recommendation. A final decision will then be made within three months. ACICS could then appeal but if the appeal is upheld, colleges will have to find a new accrediting agency within 18 months in order to be able to continue to receive federal aid.

“This is a very bold and dramatic step by the department,” according to Terry W Hartle, senior vice-president of the American Council on Education, as reported by The Washington Post. “The size of ACICS means the department is going way beyond anything they’ve done previously.”

Critics – including advocacy groups, lawmakers and state attorneys general who have urged the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity to deny the agency the recognition to operate – say the agency has repeatedly allowed institutions that are being investigated for fraud or that have achieved only very low graduation rates to be given millions of dollars in loans and grants.

In a report released on Wednesday, the department set out 21 areas in which ACICS has failed to adhere to federal rules. Officials said ACICS’ shortcomings were “extensive and pervasive”. Staff recommended denying renewal of recognition and withdrawing the agency’s current recognition.

The problems included failure to address how well graduates of institutions succeed in exams required for employment; inadequate budget contingency planning; failure to address widespread placement rate falsification by institutions; failure to consistently review at-risk institutions; and failure to strengthen initiatives against misrepresentations to students and abusive recruitment.

The ACICS case is part of a broader drive by the Barack Obama presidency. Fast rising student debt levels have driven the administration to examine outcomes of higher education and judge accreditors, as consumer protection agencies, on the quality of the institutions they accredit. While ACICS is the most high-profile example of what happens when accreditors are held to account in this way, there could be more to come.

Judith S Eaton, president of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, which represents 3,000 degree-granting colleges, told University World News that the Department of Education recommendation is consistent with its current increased emphasis on accountability, transparency and protecting students when it comes to US accreditation.

“The department is very much engaged in framing expectations of effective accreditation based on this emphasis and this applies to all types of accrediting organisations that are reviewed by our federal government,” she said.

“There is a clear message that, for accreditors to serve as gatekeepers, protecting students is first and foremost. This means more and more attention to student learning outcomes and to institutional performance. It means preventing poorly performing institutions from operating or gaining accredited status. It means keeping the public and students as fully and accurately informed as possible.”

Demonstrate support

ACICS, founded in 1912, currently accredits approximately 900 campuses – 245 main campuses and 674 additional locations – in 47 states and Puerto Rico and serves as the gatekeeper of federal student assistance funding for the vast majority of the institutions it accredits and consequently must meet the Secretary of Education’s separate and independent requirements, the report said.

The department noted that, traditionally, ACICS had been able to demonstrate its support among educators and practitioners by its varied site visitor list of several hundred experienced educators and practitioners. In addition, the agency had been able to demonstrate its acceptance by educational institutions by the extensive list of ACICS-accredited institutions.

Further, the agency had demonstrated its acceptance outside of its own universe through its recognition over the past few years by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, or CHEA. But department officials noted that CHEA deferred its decision to renew ACICS' recognition in April 2016 and asked the agency to return for review in November 2016.

Data concerns

The department’s report highlighted concerns that placement performance data was based on data that is self-reported by the institutions themselves.

The average percentage of students placed in their field or related field of study for all ACICS institutions, based on the institutions’ annual Campus Accountability Reports, was 66% in 2012, 72% in 2013, and 74% in 2014.

Yet “little, if any” of that data appears to have been verified by the agency, and because any verification by the agency appears to have taken place during the site team evaluations that only occur approximately every five years, much of the data was “too old to be of use”, the report said.

In addition, there were questions over the accuracy of job placement rates because there was documentation of a “widespread problem” with ACICS-accredited institutions providing “unverifiable or false data” in their annual reports to ACICS.

For example, the data from the Corinthian schools included fraudulent job-placement figures that led to financial challenges and ultimately closure, with major disruption for the multitudes of affected students. The job placement figures from CEC, Westwood, Le Cordon Bleu, and Lincoln Tech, among others, were also deemed fraudulent.

“The agency needs to provide reliable documentation of its acceptance by employers,” the report said.

The report questioned how the agency could operate efficiently and effectively given that it plans a US$1 million reduction in spending in 2016 and still projects a deficit of US$200,000.

The agency was also reprimanded because its on-site teams were “unable to consistently identify institutions that were unable to run their programmes efficiently”, as evidenced by their poor retention and placement rates, and by their poor stewardship of federal financial funds for student assistance.

Misrepresentations and abuse

The report noted that ACICS had applied a substantial number of sanctions to large multi-campus systems based on deficiencies in recruitment materials, advertising, class schedules and student records including grades. But it said it was apparent that the agency's process for implementing its standards in this area was “not sufficiently effective”.

“Over the last five years, a significant number of state attorneys general and others have obtained sizeable recoveries against ACICS-accredited institutions based on misrepresentations to prospective students and abusive recruiting,” the report said.

In one case cited, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan reached a US$15 million settlement with for-profit school Westwood College that forgave private debt owed by students of Westwood’s criminal justice programme, after which the college announced its closure.

Madigan also entered into two settlements with for-profit education company Education Management Corporation or EDMC, which operates five Illinois Institute of Art and Argosy University campuses. The settlements significantly reformed EDMC’s recruiting and enrolment practices, forgave more than US$3 million in loans for Illinois students, and returned money fraudulently obtained from the State of Illinois.

In another case, a student in Missouri won US$2 million in punitive damages against for-profit Vatterottt College for misrepresenting the value of her education.