Comments to NACIQI on the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools

It’s been almost five years since the recognition of the college accreditor ACICS was revoked by the US Department of Education. The reason? Former Secretary of Education John King determined in December 2016 that it would be unable to come into compliance over the next 12-months, demonstrating a risk that outweighed the benefit for students who attended ACICS institutions and taxpayers that subsidize their higher education pursuits.

This agency has an extensive list of notable and horrifying achievements for a college accreditor recognized by the federal government. Let me mention just a few to keep my promise of a three-minute time limitation. First, there was their honor roll recognition of Fast Train College in Miami, Florida, which was found by investigative authorities to have used unscrupulous recruitment activities to encourage enrollment while subsequently fabricating their high school diplomas. The owner was later found to stolen more than $6.6 million in federal financial aid.

Then there was Corinthian Colleges, a for-profit company with campuses around the country that deceived their prospective students with inflated job placement statistics. The result: Over 100 lawsuits, tens of thousands of students left with low earnings and unmanageable debt, and billions in taxpayer dollars that funded credentials worth less than the paper they were printed on. This was followed by its eventual collapse in 2015, leaving students in a lurch scrambling to find other schools to accept their credits, something that most institutions would not do.

This lack over oversight led to a similar fate at other large ACICS institutions, including ITT Tech and, more recently, Education Corporation of America, resulting again in tens of thousands of students fending for themselves with no teach-out agreements in place for them to fall back on.

The more reputable institutions switched to another accreditor following Secretary John King’s initial determination to terminate ACICS federally recognized status. What’s left? Institutions that no other college accreditor would accept as meeting their minimum quality standards. 

Looking at ED’s own most recent Accreditation Data File, we can see how poorly most ACICS schools serve their students. Two-thirds of the ACICS institutions show most students earning less than a typical high school graduate, even 10 years after initial enrollment. Even so, these schools received $698 million in that award year, even though most students showed little to no return on investment after they attend.

In summation, ACICS does not guarantee the minimum level of quality that should be expected of a federally recognized accreditor. Nor do they serve as an effective gatekeeper of taxpayer funds, putting students at risk and taxpayers with an ineffective use of federal funds. Last, they’ve shown their inability to come into compliance for four consecutive years. If history informs the future, we can assume this trend will carry on.

Thank you,

Michael Itzkowitz
Senior Fellow, Higher Education
Third Way