wife ?t OFEO II- gifting Q??aie?li?li?? 5? ?uii} ?swim 25m" . '51 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION WASHINGTON, DC 20202 September 22, 2016 Roger J. Williams, Interim President 750 First Street, NE, Suite 980 Washington, DC 20002?4241 riwilliamsfaacicsorg Dear Mr. Williams, I am writing to inform you of my decision regarding the recognition of the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools (ACICS, or the agency). Department of Education staff and the National Advisory Council on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI) have each made recommendations to me. These recommendations were made under Sections 114 and 496 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA), as amended, and pursuant to relevant statutory and regulatory provisions. Both the Department staff and NACIQI recommended that I deny petition for recognition and terminate ACICS's recognition as a nationally recognized accrediting agency. As required, I considered the ?ll record related to this matter?including petition for renewal, the ?nal staff report from Department of Education staff, the transcript of the agency?s appearance before NACIQI on June 23, 2016, recommendation, and the comments submitted under 34 C.F.R. ?602.35 by both ACICS and Department staff after the NACIQI meeting. Having reviewed the record before me, I concur with the recommendations of Department staff and NACIQI. Accordingly, I am terminating the Department?s recognition of ACICS as a nationally recognized accrediting agency. ACICS was found to be in violation of numerous regulatory criteria. Department staff reviewed a large amount of information from a variety of sources, and in the ?nal staff report identi?ed 21 areas where ACICS was out of compliance with the applicable regulations. I agree that ACICS is out of compliance in these areas?speci?cally: gov The Department of Education ?5 mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for giobai competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equai access. 34 C.F.R. ?602.13 34 C.F.R. ?602.17(a) 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. ?602.17(c) 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. ?602.18(d) 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. ?602.19(b) 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. ?602.20(a) 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. ?602.20(b) 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. 34 C.F.R. Under the law, an accrediting agency that is out of compliance cannot have its recognition renewed. Agencies may, however, be given up to 12 months to come into compliance. The Department of Education staff report concluded that ACICS could not remedy many of the serious de?ciencies identi?ed and therefore come into compliance within 12 months. During the NACIQI meeting, citing their judgment based on many years of experience, Department staff and multiple NACIQI committee members echoed the report?s conclusions, despite recognizing that ACICS could likely remedy some of the de?ciencies in 12 months. At the NACIQI meeting and in its comments submitted after the NACIQI meeting, ACICS argued that it will be able to comply with each of the regulatory criteria within 12 months. ACICS points to a number of recent actions the agency has taken to address areas of non? compliance. I acknowledge that the agency has made recent efforts to address some of the de?ciencies identi?ed?including by revising various policies and restructuring internal governance bodies. Further, I recognize that it is possible for ACICS to ?x some of the 21 compliance problems within 12 months. But overall, I agree with Department staff and NACIQI that ACICS could not come into full compliance within 12 months. These violations reveal fundamental problems with the agency?s functions as an accreditor. For exampleu?and this list is not exhaustive?the staff report outlines major problems with: the rigor of the agency?s accreditation and preaccreditation standards and its application of those standards (34 C.F.R. 602.16(a) and 602.17); its monitoring of the institutions that it accredits (34 C.F.R. and the enforcement of its own accrediting standards (34 C.F.R. ?602.20). track record does not inspire con?dence that it can address all of the problems effectively. Many of the problems identi?ed in the staff report are serious and long-standing. The agency still has not fully addressed issues originally identi?ed in 2013, such as its veri?cation bf placement information from institutions. And most of the remedial efforts currently underway began in earnest just several months ago, despite having reason to take action long before that. Finally, as made clear in 34 C.F.R. 602.32(b) and demonstrating compliance in this case requires more than just new policies that address the issues identi?ed by Department staff; it requires evidence of effective application and implementation of those new policies, practices, and governance structures, which the agency simply cannot provide for all of these criteria within 12 months. In sum, the evidence establishes that the recommendation of Department staff and NACIQI is reasonable and well-justi?ed. I concur with that recommendation. Pending any appeal to the Secretary under 34 C.F.R. ?602.37, my decision to withdraw and terminate the Department?s recognition from ACICS is the ?nal decision of the Department. Sincerely, LA Emma Vadehra Chief of Staff