NACIQI Will Review a Problematic Accreditor Today: Here's What that Means.

The National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI) is holding its bi-yearly meeting this week. On its agenda is the review of a hotly contested accreditor: ACICS.

Twice a year, NACIQI draws on Education Department reports to review and provide its own recommendations on accrediting agencies to ensure they are following federal regulations and assuring quality education in the colleges they approve. If NACIQI finds an accreditor is doing a good enough job, they will recommend them for recognition to the Department of Education. Recognition then gives the accreditor the power to determine whether a college meets their standards and is worthy of accessing students' federal financial aid, like Pell Grants and loans. At this week's meeting, ACICS's privilege of serving as a gatekeeper to students' federal aid is up for debate.

Accrediting colleges is a big responsibility, but not all accreditors do a good job. ACICS has a problematic history going back to at least 2016, when the Obama administration withdrew its recognition of ACICS for being out of compliance with many federal regulations. But former Education Secretary Betsy Devos (a friend of the for-profit college industry) reinstated ACICS' federal recognition in 2018 following a lawsuit by the agency, under the condition that the accreditor come back into compliance within 12 months. This allowed ACICS to approve schools again — yet they have not become compliant since.

This week, NACIQI will consider four separate Department of Education reports that find ACICS out of compliance with federal regulations. This unprecedented four-part review will look at the following:

1. A compliance report required by Secretary DeVos on a lack of competent and knowledgeable decision-makers at ACICS;
2. A monitoring report required by DeVos on ACICS’ problems with administrative and fiscal capability and its ability to effectively monitor institutions;
3. An inquiry initiated by Department staff into concerns of ACICS’ oversight of Reagan National University; and
4. Yet another inquiry, also initiated by Department staff, into the agency’s handling of Virginia International University.

Compliance Report: ACICS' Site Visitors Were Not "Competent and Knowledgeable"

First, NACIQI is slated to review a compliance report showing that ACICS is not in compliance with a federal standard requiring them to have "competent and knowledgeable individuals" reviewing their schools and making accrediting decisions. In the report, Department staff found that ACICS’ site visitor training has been inadequate and couldn't prove it was effective. And multiple institutions cited in the review—including Virginia International University and Reagan National University, the two inquiries that each have their own reports—added to the Department’s concerns about site visitor and decision-maker training. This is one of the issues that ACICS was out of compliance with in 2018 when Devos reinstated their recognition. Despite the maximum 12-month grace period allowed under federal law, ACICS has yet to resolve the issue years later.

Monitoring Report: ACICS Cannot Effectively Monitor its Colleges

Next, NACIQI will review ACICS' administrative and fiscal capability, as well as its historical inability to effectively monitor its colleges — both issues cited in the 2018 DeVos decision to restore the agency’s recognition. ACICS is supposed to serve as an independent evaluator of quality, one of its biggest problems is that it has historically taken a reactive approach when it comes to its noncompliant schools. For instance, with both Virginia International University and Reagan National University, it wasn’t until external entities brought these schools to ACICS' attention that the accreditor took note of major problems at the colleges. It wasn’t able to turn up those problems on its own, either through its regular accreditation processes, or through its continuous monitoring of accredited schools. ACICS should proactively ensure its colleges provide a high-quality education and remain in compliance with accrediting agency standards. The accreditor has proven it cannot be considered an effective watchdog or gatekeeper to students' federal financial aid.

The Last Reports: Inquiries Into Two Very-Out-of-Compliance Colleges

NACIQI will also review the record on two ACICS institutions that raised particular concerns at the Education Department: Virginia International University (VIU) and Reagan National University (RNU).

Virginia International University was fully accredited by ACICS. But the university had several issues, especially in its distance education programs, with grade inflation, rampant cheating, and inadequate interaction between students and faculty. ACICS only took action after the state higher education agency in Virginia audited the school and notified them of the problems they found. All the while, ACICS fell short in its oversight of the institution and failed to identify these issues through its own accreditation processes and monitoring— particularly a concern as many institutions have moved online during the pandemic.

In the case of Reagan National University, ACICS' reviewers found various issues as well—such as students not having syllabi or textbooks, and confusion over what type of programming the school offered—but accredited the institution anyway. A few years later, the agency placed RNU on a sanction for many of the same issues, suggesting they were probably never fixed in the first place. And ultimately, it was a reporter that tipped off ACICS that the school had shuttered, with no students or faculty left, without ACICS even noticing.

Over the years, ACICS granted accreditation to both of these institutions despite both being out of compliance with its own accreditation standards at various points. They are stark examples that ACICS does not effectively hold colleges up to reasonable standards of quality — and that its actions have led to real consequences for the students enrolled in those programs.

In all four reports, the accreditation experts at the Education Department made the recommendation to withdraw ACICS’ recognition immediately. NACIQI will use the content of these reports as a basis for determining whether they will also recommend ACICS' termination to the Department of Education official responsible for making that decision. These reports show the many ways ACICS has been out of compliance with federal standards for several years and that, despite longer amounts of time than allowed by law and various opportunities to improve, the accreditor has shown that it has not met, and very likely will not meet, the standards required to be an accreditor. NACIQI should, without a doubt, vote to recommend that the Department revoke ACICS' recognition and terminate its ability to approve colleges for students' federal financial aid. Without that vote, ACICS is likely to continue its problematic practices and hurt students along the way.

Enjoy what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter to receive updates on what’s new in Education Policy!