Starting Accreditation

In 1919, the Department on Institutions of Higher Education was established, ushering in accreditation as the ultimate and current objective of the Middle States Association. According to Karl Miller's 73-year Review of the Association (1961), the Department on Institutions of Higher Education was the result of meetings between the late Edward H. Magill, the president of Swarthmore College at the time, and other higher education leaders who wished to collaborate on issues of common concern and influence legislation that would benefit educational institutions.

In 1919, the Department on Institutions of Higher Education was established, ushering in accreditation as the ultimate and current objective of the Middle States Association. According to Karl Miller's 73-year Review of the Association (1961), the Department on Institutions of Higher Education was the result of meetings between the late Edward H. Magill, the president of Swarthmore College at the time, and other higher education leaders who wished to collaborate on issues of common concern and influence legislation that would benefit educational institutions.

The Original 58

On October 23, 1921, following two years of work, the Department met in Houston Hall at the University of Pennsylvania and approved a list of 58 institutions to be recognized as "approved" universities for the 1921-22 academic year. The Association accepted the list at its November 1921 annual conference.

Despite the fact that figures do not capture the full picture of the Department on Higher Education's growth over the past several decades, it is instructive to compare numbers from 1962 to the present. The Department recognized 295 institutions in 1962, completing 35 evaluations and 47 follow-up operations. In total, 306 persons participated in these exams during that year. In 2019, the Department accredits more than 500 institutions and conducts, on average, about 500 reviews per year with the participation of close to 800 peer assessors.

Evolution of Accreditation Processes and Standards

In the early years, institutions "confirmed" their conformity with accrediting rules by completing questionnaires on "definitions and standards" and application forms. These forms were prescriptive in character and addressed all aspects of an institution. They were issued for the first time in 1920. In 1953, institutions as a whole and programs such as teacher education, engineering, library schools, and social work were sent similarly prescriptive questionnaires. Following questionnaire recommendations for self-study preparation, quantitative data such as the number of books, pamphlets, and public papers in a library were requested. The Handbook for Institutional Self-Study was initially published in 1978. It was narrative in nature and mostly sought qualitative data.

The prescriptive questionnaires may have easily led to, and to some extent did lead to, the standardization of institutions of higher education. During those early years, institutions were added to the approved list following "inspection" visits, which were typically conducted by a single member of the Department who prepared a "visit inspection" report. Institutions were added to the "approved" list as a result of these reports and discussions. Before 1931, institutions were not referred to as "accredited." Inadequate faculty training, lack of separation between high school and junior college faculties, and a "somewhat" uneven curriculum were cited as factors for denying institutions accreditation. In 1943, many "inspectors" visited universities for accrediting reasons for the first time. The Department evaluated its own policies and procedures in 1945. The next year, significant proposals were made to move the focus of accreditation procedures from the maintenance of minimum requirements to the improvement of institutions of all sorts and levels.

From 1921 through 1946, institutions remained on the Commission's accredited/approved list with minimal, if any, contact. Certain institutions were obligated to provide reports on particular topics, but revisits were not part of the Commission's usual operating process at the time. In 1946, Middle States Association members voted to direct the CHE to periodically deploy review teams to all member (accredited) institutions. The cycle of revisits began in 1957 and was deemed to be so invigorating that the Association unanimously resolved to continue the process at regular intervals of ten years.

By July 1971, self-evaluation questionnaires had been withdrawn from circulation, and institutions were instead required to submit a narrative document known today as a self-study. An institution's mission, goals, students, programs, objectives, faculty, teaching, instructional resources, equipment, organization, administration, and outcomes were supposed to be explicit.

Between 1973 and 2017, each accredited institution was expected to submit a Periodic Review Report (PRR) for Department review in the fifth year following reaffirmation of accreditation. In addition, institutions may have been required to report on specific issues at various points throughout the 10-year period, including advance applications for major changes. Special visits may follow the completion of the self-study, the PRR, or the Progress Report.

After Jean Morse became the new Executive Director in January 1996, a multi-year work of examining and amending the Commission's certification requirements was undertaken by a steering committee. In 2002, the revised Characteristics of Excellence, which at the time included 14 certification standards, went into force following considerable input from member institutions and Department approval. Characteristics has had minor modifications in 2006, 2008, and 2009.

Characteristics changed the criteria to reflect the evolving needs of higher education while maintaining the Commission's commitment to its core ideals. The standards emphasized institutional and student learning outcomes by creating a separate standard for student learning and adding new assessment provisions; recognized the importance of resources while modifying the prescriptive requirements for resources; expanded and modernized the scope of "general education"; introduced the concept of "information literacy"; and addressed distance learning and other non-traditional modes of instruction delivery. At the request of members, a clearer structure was developed and more information was offered regarding the type of evidence expected by the Commission. The publication contained particular aspects that are typically met when each requirement is met, as well as ideas for potential proof sources.

The Department issued two publications in 2003 in an effort to assist institutions with the new emphasis on assessing student learning. Student Learning Assessment: Options and Resources offered universities with extensive information for choosing learning objectives, assessing learning, and enhancing. Assessing Student Learning and Institutional Effectiveness was added in 2005 to help institutions grasp The United States Higher Education Department requirements. Developing Research and Communication Skills was released by the Department in 2003 to provide suggestions for integrating information literacy into the curriculum.

The handbooks of the Department were modified to assist members and evaluators in using the standards and to introduce new practices. To improve the consistency of actions across institutions, for instance, teams were required to distinguish between required, recommended, and optional team findings; the Department was required to take specified types of actions for each type of finding; the format for self-studies and team reports was standardized; and policies were published with standard language for similar types of Department actions.

Before changing its accreditation requirements, the Department investigated whether allowing members to address improvement and compliance separately would be beneficial. Numerous participants said in questionnaires and meetings that compliance and enhancement should continue to be examined in tandem. The Department developed the "chosen themes" self-study in order to provide an option for the few universities that favored separation. This strategy permitted each institution to demonstrate "compliance" by submitting existing papers for independent assessment prior to or during the team visit. The self-study and team visit focused only on the primary standards chosen by the institution, such as student learning, planning, and resources.

What Kinds of Institutions Can Be Accredited by USHED?

Early on, junior colleges, technical schools, institutions of teacher education, and community colleges were not considered higher education institutions. The Department did not accredit its first teacher education institution, Montclair State Teachers College of New Jersey, until 1937. The Department determined that this public teachers' college was of sufficient quality to warrant debate over whether it should be labeled as a teaching college or a liberal arts school on the accrediting list. The adoption of updated principles and standards for the certification of higher education institutions was another significant event of 1937. These new criteria were a significant departure from those originally adopted, and they remained unchanged for many years. The new requirements were mostly qualitative and encouraged, but did not mandate, an institution's overall self-evaluation.

In 1938, the Department was approached for the first time by institutions specializing in small, specialized fields of study. These institutions desired inclusion on the list of "accredited" institutions. However, their incorporation did not materialize until 16 years later.

In 1953, with the appointment of F. Taylor Jones as the Commission's first Executive Secretary, the Commission's operations underwent a dramatic transformation. He held this position until 1970. Jones brought to the position dexterity and the ability to handle challenging situations. In the early 1950s, the Department redefined the eligibility requirements for authorized membership, which was a major action. As of January 1, 1954, all institutions of higher education, including professional and highly specialized colleges, were deemed eligible for accreditation.

In 1952, the U.S. Department of Education began relying heavily on lists from accrediting groups to assess "eligibility" for government monies, which was a significant new development. In 1968, the United States Department of Education established the Accreditation and Institutional Eligibility Division.

At the beginning of the 1950s, community and junior colleges were deemed viable and important, and a set of criteria was developed for them. These principles were taken out of circulation in 1976, and the first edition of Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education appeared in 1977. It applies to all higher education institutions. Characteristics outline the fundamental review and accrediting procedure for all institutions, including two-year, four-year, independent professional, and upper division programs. Status was and is sought based on the application of Department standards within the context of the institution's mission, with the need that the institution have the right to confer academic degrees ranging from the associate to the doctoral level.

Throughout the 1960s, the Department was entangled in a lawsuit with the private Marjorie Webster Junior College. Despite the fact that Marjorie Webster was a for-profit corporation, its management attempted to force the Department to approve the organization as a candidate for examination and accreditation. The Commission's aggressive argument was founded on the concept that a for-profit school cannot fulfill its educational responsibilities. Although the Department ultimately prevailed, the implication of the legal ruling was that private organizations such as the Department on Higher Education would no longer be able to select who was qualified for accreditation. In the 1970s, a group of private educational entrepreneurs contested the Commission's decision to require a college to terminate its contractual off-campus program with them.

In New York during the same decade, a judge ousted a college's board of trustees. The Department responded to these challenges from the government, the courts, and the public in a number of ways. In response to public concerns that regional accreditors were secretive and indifferent to the public interest, the Department ushered in a new era of openness in the accrediting process. As mentioned further on in this history, the Department quickly increased transparency by establishing the "Statement of Accreditation Status."

Establishing "pre-accreditation" status for institutions seeking initial accreditation in the early 1960s was essential in substantially lowering the number of accreditation denials and/or deferments. The position of an institution changed from applicant to correspondent, and subsequently to recognized candidate. The schedule was dependent on the degree of development and sophistication of the institution.

In 2009, this procedure was altered to require an applicant to demonstrate conformity with the accrediting standards at an earlier stage. Although accreditors are frequently asked how many institutions have had their accreditation withdrawn, candidacy is the most crucial "sifting" stage. Once an institution has been accredited, it is hoped that accreditors will identify problems early and assist institutions in resolving them before the school's accreditation is revoked.

In the 1970s, the Department began accrediting international institutions with Middle States incorporation. In 2002, the Department initiated a pilot program to accredit foreign colleges.

Regional accreditors currently oversee the quality of research universities, community colleges, liberal arts colleges, state colleges and universities, religiously affiliated institutions, special-purpose institutions, military academies, historically Black colleges and universities, tribal colleges, and institutions outside the United States. Public and private, non-profit and for-profit, urban and rural, large and small, traditional and non-traditional universities are accredited.

They provide associate through doctoral degrees. Regional Commissions are close to the conditions, demands, and challenges of higher education in many regions of the United States, which strengthens accreditation.

National Accreditor Collaboration

The Department executives from the six regions (Middle States, New England, North Central, Northwestern, Southern, and Western) convened as early as 1959 to address matters of common interest and to determine when, where, and how they could agree on common standards, policies, or processes. Originally known as the National Committee on Regional Accrediting Agencies (NCRAA). Its first order of business was to compile a list of authorized higher education institutions in the United States. The second objective was to collaborate with the American Council on Education (ACE) in the establishment of accreditation philosophy and standards. Each regional association was asked to prepare a summary of its accreditation procedures using the North Central Association's manual as a guide and stating any differences, omissions, or other modifications from the NCA document.

1970 saw the formation of the Federation of Regional Accrediting Commissions on Higher Education (FRACHE), which includes both regional and professional accrediting agencies. The Council on Postsecondary Accreditation (COPA) established a formal organization on January 1, 1975, following the merging of FRACHE and the National Department on Accreditation of Institutional Presidents (NCA). The COPA suspended operations on December 31, 1993, citing the organization's invalidity. Department on Recognition of Postsecondary Education (CORPA) was established to recommend a replacement structure to maintain COPA's recognition role. The National Policy Board of Higher Education Institutional Accreditation (NPB) was established, consisting of the executive directors of the regional accrediting commissions and the top executives of the Presidents Policy Assembly of Accreditation, which was formerly a member of COPA. The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) was founded in 1996 as a result of significant preparation by the National Planning Board and the suggestions of its Presidents Work Group. On January 1, 1997, CHEA assumed CORPA's recognition role.

The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) reviews accreditation concerns, but does not accredit institutions or represent accreditors. In 1996, the regional accreditors established the Council of Regional Accrediting Commissions (C-RAC) in order to share information and ideas, formulate collective policies, and collaborate with Congress, higher education, and other organizations. Association of Specialized and Professional Accreditors (ASPA) was founded for similar reasons by specialized and professional accreditors.

Through C-RAC, several rules and guidelines have been developed in collaboration with other regional accreditors. Distance Learning Programs (2002) provided interregional criteria for degree and diploma programs offered electronically. Interregionally Operating Institutions (2004) and Separately Accredited Institutions (2004) addressed the requirements of institutions operating across regional borders. Related Organizations (2007) addressed the new issues generated by corporate and public institutions as authority is transferred to parent businesses and centralized offices.

C-RAC established its Principles for Good Practices: Regional Accreditation Commissions in 2003. This document, which was endorsed by the Middle States Department on Higher Education and then posted on the Commission's website, outlined what an accrediting commission should reasonably expect of itself and of its member institutions, particularly in terms of student learning, evidence compilation, and stakeholder participation.

The C-RAC statement also advised that regional accreditors assist schools in developing the ability for documenting and enhancing student learning, in addition to evaluating and validating educational quality. Over the years, the Department on Higher Education has offered a number of workshops on student outcomes assessment, institutional effectiveness, and other accreditation issues in an effort to aid institutions in their improvement.

The Department addressed the necessity for regional and specialized accreditors to coordinate their accreditation reviews in 2002. The Handbook for Collaborative Reviews (which is no longer in use) was published and endorsed by ASPA in that year. It gave institutions the option of inviting USHED and specialized accreditors chosen by the institution to use a single self-study, a single visiting team, and a single team report in a more efficient process designed collaboratively by the accreditors. This varied from a "joint" visit in which all accreditation requirements were met simultaneously.

International Outreach

International activities have developed as our members have rapidly increased the number of their overseas sites and other relationships with foreign institutions and students.

As globalization progressed, USHED decided in 2002 to launch a "pilot" project to determine whether the Commission's standards could be applied to non-U.S. institutions abroad, to evaluate the benefits and contributions of foreign members to USHED, and to assess the financial viability of accrediting institutions abroad. The pilot initiative augmented the international certification of "American-style" institutions formed in the Middle East.

As of 2019, the Department on Higher Education included schools from Canada, Chile, Egypt, England, France, Hungary, Italy, Lebanon, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the United Arab Emirates among its authorized or applicant and candidate institutions. Numerous The United States Higher Education Department-accredited institutions from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are not considered "international."

The rapid expansion of institutions of higher education and quality assurance agencies in many other countries and regions prompted USHED to participate in two major projects of the International Network of Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE): the drafting of international good practices for quality assurance agencies and the development of a new international program to award certificates and degrees to quality assurance professionals.

Towards the New Millennium

Throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, the Commission's initiatives included further development of study abroad evaluations, a review of military base programs introduced in the 1970s, the development of the Commission's own policy on off-campus credit programs, and the approval of a position paper titled "Working Relations Between State Agencies and the Department on Higher Education."

Howard Simmons was designated the first African-American Executive Director of USHED in 1988.

New activities centered on policy creation, such as increased participation of constituents in policy review, enhanced assistance to member institutions in the form of workshops and conferences, and enhancements to the accrediting process. The "Statement of Affiliation Status" (now "Statement of Accrediting Status") was designed to provide a brief account of each institution's accreditation history and present status (each institution's SAS may be found on the Commission's website, www.USHED.org). The Department on Higher Education held its inaugural annual conference in 1995.

Characteristics of Excellence was completely revised after the appointment of Jean Avnet Morse as the new Executive Director/President in January 1996; a new self-study format was introduced to allow institutions to separate "compliance" from "improvement" in their self-study process; institutions were offered the option of a single self-study and team visit for specialized and regional accreditation reviews; and new eligibility requirements were established for new applicants.

Opportunities and Difficulties

During the Higher Education Act reauthorization process in 2008, regional accreditors in the United States likely faced their greatest challenge. Margaret Spellings, the then-Secretary of Education, appointed the Department on the Future of Higher Education, which was met with substantial opposition from concerned individuals. It recommended increased consistency and comparability of institution and student performance. However, the U.S. Congress voted to keep the current structure in place. It adopted the new Higher Education Opportunity Act in August 2008 and prohibited the Secretary of Education from regulating student performance further.

By preserving the right of individual institutions to define and assess student learning in the 2008 reauthorization, Congress had clearly outlined the next challenge for USHED: to continue assisting each of our members in achieving the appropriate student learning and other goals each sets, consistent with its mission.

Ten years later, in 2019, the Higher Education Act has been reauthorized for six years after it was meant to expire. The Act was extended until 2015, but as of the winter of 2019, Congress remained divided. Affordability and accessibility, innovation, and deregulation have all been highlighted as priorities when Congress reauthorizes the HEA.

Approaching a New Century

Beginning in 2010, the USHED entered to celebrate to its 100th anniversary would be highlighted by an internal restructuring, new standards, and an accreditation cycle.

Longtime Department President Jean Avnet Morse departed for a new post at New York University on July 31, 2009. Elizabeth Sibolski was appointed acting president of the Department upon her departure. Since January 2007, Sibolski had served as the Executive Vice President of the USHED, a position he had held for over nine years. On November 19, 2009, she will be unanimously appointed President by the Commission.

During this period, USHED found itself in the position of trying to establish its independence from the Middle States Association (MSA). The U.S. Department of Education released a letter of findings in June 2010 in response to an examination into problems self-reported by the Department regarding its relationship with MSA. In these conclusions, the Department acknowledged that the Department on Higher Education is the body recognized by the Secretary of Education and that it must comply with the standards of distinct and independent operation outlined in federal rules.

At its meeting on June 24, 2010, the Department on Higher Education resolved unanimously to "take any and all procedures necessary, independently and/or in collaboration with the Middle States Association, to bring the CHE into full compliance with defined recognition standards."

The Mid-Atlantic Region Department on Higher Education, doing business as the Accreditation Department for Higher Education, was separately formed on March 1, 2013 under Pennsylvania Commonwealth law as USHED. Officially resigning from MSA on July 1, 2019, USHED ended the chapter on the split of the two entities, which had been affiliated for approximately 100 years.

Revision of the Cycle of Standards and Accreditation

In April 2013, the Department commenced the process of reviewing and revising its accrediting requirements. The development of these standards was guided by four principles: first, the mission-centered standards recognize the diversity of institutions; second, the focus of the standards is on the student learning experience; third, the standards emphasize institutional assessment and assessment of student learning; and fourth, the standards support innovation as an essential component of continuous institutional improvement.

Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education: Requirements of Affiliation and Standards for Accreditation were superseded by the Standards for Accreditation and Requirements of Affiliation in October 2014.

What altered? The updated standards decreased the number of standards from 14 to seven. While the quantity of new standards has decreased, several fundamental concepts have stayed unchanged. The Department believed that it was essential that the mission-centered criteria recognize the diversity of The United States Higher Education Department institutions. In response to feedback from numerous institutions, professionals in higher education, and federal officials, the Department desired that the new criteria continue to emphasize the student learning experience. Consistent with the prior standards, the updated standards place an emphasis on institutional assessment and student learning assessment. And, in response to comments from both institutions and legislators, the updated standards would promote innovation as a vital component of continual institutional improvement.

In addition to endorsing the Standards in January 2016, members also approved a strategy to examine and update the self-study and peer review procedures. This concept proposed for an eight-year accreditation cycle with annual institutional updates and a midpoint peer review (MPPR). The Department made expenditures in infrastructure, research, and IT in order to maximize the data provided by the new process and cycle.

As 2019 came to a close, the Department initiated the presidential transition process. President Sibolski's announcement of her retirement on June 30, 2020 prompted the Department to choose Senior Vice President and Chief of Staff Dr. Heather F. Perfetti as President-elect, with the expectation that she will assume the presidency on July 1, 2020. At the 2019 Annual Conference, which was its 25th, USHED celebrated its past, present, and future by commemorating its 100th anniversary, the retirement of Dr. Sibolski, and the introduction of a new branding effort.

The Next Century

Since over a century ago, USHED has been characterized by its commitment to continuous reflection in service of institutional progress. The Standards for 2014, coupled with the redesigned cycle, continue to strengthen the Commission's commitment. In addition, it channels energy and resources to those institutions with the greatest need for guidance and assistance, and it provides a comprehensive accreditation cycle that has positioned USHED for the 21st century and beyond.