Another Member of Former Regional Accreditors’ Group Leaves

Another institutional accreditor has left the Council of Recognized Accrediting Commissions (C-RAC)—the second departure in the last two months from the group of what were once called regional accreditors.

In 2019, the first Trump administration nixed geographic boundaries inside which college and university accreditors could operate. Institutions nationwide can increasingly choose which of these private organizations to seek accreditation from. Accreditation provides not just an imprimatur of quality—it can qualify institutions to receive federal student aid funding, including student loans, if the accreditor is federally recognized.

In January of this year, C-RAC finally made the R in its name stand for recognized instead of regional. But it’s now lost two of its seven formerly regional members.

In a news release, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education announced its withdrawal, effective Tuesday. The Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities previously announced its exit, effective July 1. Middle States said it is “driving broader partnerships that best support our work in this changing higher education environment,” but didn’t provide more specifics about its decision.

The five remaining members are the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, the Higher Learning Commission, the New England Commission of Higher Education, the Commission on Colleges and Universities (formerly known as the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges), and the WASC Senior College and University Commission.

Inside Higher Ed asked each Wednesday whether they planned to stay in C-RAC. The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, the Higher Learning Commission and the New England Commission were the only ones to respond, and all said yes. C-RAC plans to meet next month in Washington, D.C.

“C-RAC has always been a voluntary association, and people are free to join or to leave,” said Larry Schall, president of the New England Commission and vice-chair of C-RAC. “Things have certainly changed since the regional boundaries were broken, and I think each of our agencies have different perspectives on growth, different perspectives on the administration.”

He said C-RAC has no staff or budget, but is rather “an informal organization that was put together because we were all doing similar kinds of work—and we thought we could learn about things going on, particularly in Washington, sort of in an efficient way.”

“It certainly doesn’t stifle us,” Schall said. “We’re independent; we act independently.”

Middle States said in its release that “we continue to partner individually with other accrediting commissions,” adding, “we are proud partners on projects” with “individual members of C-RAC” and others.

The accreditor didn’t provide an interview Wednesday. A spokesperson said in a brief email that “the decision resulted from a number of considerations.”

Schall and Higher Learning Commission President Barbara Gellman-Danley both said they didn’t have further information, beyond Middle States’ news release, on why it left.

But accreditation leaders have other avenues to work together, including a relatively new one. In May, the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, a membership organization that also recognizes accreditors that meet its standards, announced a working group called the Accreditor Leadership Roundtable. CHEA said its president developed the roundtable alongside Northwest Commission President Selena M. Grace, who serves as co-chair, and also collaborated with the presidents of Middle States and WASC, who are now both on the roundtable.

Unlike C-RAC, the roundtable includes the new Commission for Public Higher Education and other accreditors that were never subject to geographic boundaries.

When the Northwest Commission announced in June it was leaving C-RAC, it touted its “continued partnership with the Council for Higher Education Accreditation,” saying the new roundtable “embodies the agility, creativity, and innovative collaboration” that it “believes this moment requires.”

Grace further told The Chronicle of Higher Education in June that the formerly regional accreditors that comprised C-RAC were increasingly competing with one another. She told The Chronicle that C-RAC’s structure doesn’t allow for engaging nationally “with all different accreditor types” and “it’s difficult to come together on policy issues.”

“By engaging at a national level with diverse accreditor types,” she told The Chronicle, “I think we can change and carry the message much better than by staying in our historical clique.”

But Antoinette Flores, vice president of federal policy and government relations for CHEA, said its roundtable wasn’t created to replace C-RAC.

“The two are entirely unrelated,” Flores said, adding that the roundtable “brings together a wide variety of agencies, including both institutional and programmatic, those that are federally recognized and those that are not.”

Gellman-Danley, of the Higher Learning Commission, said C-RAC is “still moving forward. We enjoy the opportunities to work together.” She noted it has continued for six years since the end of the regional accreditation boundaries, and it’s not opposed to competition from new accreditors.

“HLC is very committed to the C-RAC group,” she said.