2009—Subsec. (a)(6)(G). Pub. L. 111–39 substituted semicolon for period at end.
2008—Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 110–315, § 495(1)(A), added par. (4) and struck out former par. (4) which read as follows: “such agency or association consistently applies and enforces standards that ensure that the courses or programs of instruction, training, or study offered by the institution of higher education, including distance education courses or programs, are of sufficient quality to achieve, for the duration of the accreditation period, the stated objective for which the courses or the programs are offered;”.
Subsec. (a)(5)(A). Pub. L. 110–315, § 495(1)(B), amended subpar. (A) generally. Prior to amendment, subpar. (A) read as follows: “success with respect to student achievement in relation to the institution’s mission, including, as appropriate, consideration of course completion, State licensing examinations, and job placement rates;”.
Subsec. (a)(6). Pub. L. 110–315, § 495(1)(C), added par. (6) and struck out former par. (6) which read as follows: “such agency or association shall apply procedures throughout the accrediting process, including evaluation and withdrawal proceedings, that comply with due process, including—
“(A) adequate specification of requirements and deficiencies at the institution of higher education or program being examined;
“(B) notice of an opportunity for a hearing by any such institution;
“(C) the right to appeal any adverse action against any such institution; and
“(D) the right to representation by counsel for any such institution;”.
Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 110–315, § 495(2)(A), inserted “, including those regarding distance education” after “their responsibilities”.
Subsec. (c)(2) to (8). Pub. L. 110–315, § 495(2)(B)–(D), added pars. (2), (3), and (7), redesignated former pars. (2) to (6) as (4) to (8), respectively, and struck out former par. (7) which read as follows: “maintains and makes publicly available written materials regarding standards and procedures for accreditation, appeal procedures, and the accreditation status of each institution subject to its jurisdiction; and”.
Subsec. (c)(9). Pub. L. 110–315, § 495(2)(E), (F), added par. (9).
Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 110–315, § 495(3), inserted at end “Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the Secretary to establish any criteria that specifies, defines, or prescribes the standards that accrediting agencies or associations shall use to assess any institution’s success with respect to student achievement.”
Subsec. (o). Pub. L. 110–315, § 495(4), inserted at end “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall not promulgate any regulation with respect to the standards of an accreditation agency or association described in subsection (a)(5).”
Subsecs. (p), (q). Pub. L. 110–315, § 495(5), added subsecs. (p) and (q).
1998—Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(a)(2), substituted “Recognition” for “Approval” in section catchline.
Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(1), (2), substituted “Criteria” for “Standards” in heading and “criteria” for “standards” wherever appearing in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(3), substituted “offered by the institution” for “at the institution” and inserted “, including distance education courses or programs,” after “higher education”.
Subsec. (a)(5). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(4)(A), (H), substituted “for accreditation” for “of accreditation” in introductory provisions and “(A), (H), and (J)” for “(G), (H), (I), (J), and (L)” in concluding provisions.
Subsec. (a)(5)(A) to (G). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(4)(C), (E), added subpar. (A) and redesignated former subpars. (A) to (F) as (B) to (G), respectively. Former subpar. (G) redesignated (H).
Subsec. (a)(5)(H). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(4)(F), substituted “measures of program length” for “program length and tuition and fees in relation to the subject matters taught”.
Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(4)(C), redesignated subpar. (G) as (H).
Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(4)(B), struck out subpar. (H) which read as follows: “measures of program length in clock hours or credit hours;”.
Subsec. (a)(5)(I). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(4)(B), (D), redesignated subpar. (K) as (I) and struck out former subpar. (I) which read as follows: “success with respect to student achievement in relation to its mission, including, as appropriate, consideration of course completion, State licensing examination, and job placement rates;”.
Subsec. (a)(5)(J). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(4)(G), inserted “record of” before “compliance”, substituted “based on the most recent student loan default rate data provided by the Secretary, the” for “, including any”, and inserted “any” after “reviews, and”.
Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(4)(B), (D), redesignated subpar. (L) as (J) and struck out former subpar. (J) which read as follows: “default rates in the student loan programs under this subchapter, based on the most recent data provided by the Secretary;”.
Subsec. (a)(5)(K), (L). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(4)(D), redesignated subpars. (K) and (L) as (I) and (J), respectively.
Subsec. (a)(7). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(5), substituted “State licensing or authorizing agency” for “State postsecondary review entity”.
Subsec. (a)(8). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(b)(6), substituted “State licensing or authorizing agency” for “State postsecondary review entity of the State in which the institution of higher education is located”.
Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(c)(1), substituted “recognized by the Secretary” for “approved by the Secretary” in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(c)(2), substituted “(which may include unannounced site visits)” for “(at least one of which inspections at each institution that provides vocational education and training shall be unannounced),”.
Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(d)(1), substituted “recognition” for “approval” in heading and “recognized” for “approved” in text.
Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(d)(2), substituted “recognized” for “approved”.
Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(d)(3), substituted “criteria” for “standards” in heading and “establish criteria” for “establish standards” in text.
Subsec. (j). Pub. L. 105–244, § 102(b)(5), substituted “section 1002” for “section 1088” in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (k). Pub. L. 105–244, §§ 102(b)(5), 492(d)(4)(A), amended subsec. (k) identically, substituting “section 1002” for “section 1088” in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (k)(2). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(d)(4)(B), substituted “criteria” for “standards”.
Subsec. (l). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(d)(5), substituted “recognition” for “approval” in heading, added par. (1), and struck out former par. (1) which read as follows: “The Secretary shall limit, suspend, or terminate the approval of an accrediting agency or association if the Secretary determines, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, that the accrediting agency or association has failed to apply effectively the standards or operate according to the procedures provided in this section.”
Subsec. (n)(1). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(d)(6)(A), substituted “criteria” for “standards” in introductory provisions.
Subsec. (n)(3). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(d)(6)(A), (B), substituted “criteria” for “standards” in two places, “recognition process” for “approval process”, and “recognition or denial of recognition” for “approval or disapproval”, and inserted at end “When the Secretary decides to recognize an accrediting agency or association, the Secretary shall determine the agency or association’s scope of recognition. If the agency or association reviews institutions offering distance education courses or programs and the Secretary determines that the agency or association meets the requirements of this section, then the agency shall be recognized and the scope of recognition shall include accreditation of institutions offering distance education courses or programs.”
Subsec. (n)(4). Pub. L. 105–244, § 492(d)(6)(C), added par. (4) and struck out former par. (4) which read as follows: “The Secretary shall maintain sufficient documentation to support the conclusions reached in the approval process, and, upon disapproval of any accreditation agency or association, shall make publicly available the reason for such disapproval, including reference to the specific standards under this section which have not been fulfilled.”
1993—Subsec. (a)(2)(A)(i). Pub. L. 103–208, § 2(i)(3), inserted “of institutions of higher education” after “membership”.
Subsec. (a)(3)(A). Pub. L. 103–208, § 2(i)(4), substituted “subparagraph (A)(i)” for “subparagraph (A)”.
Subsec. (a)(5). Pub. L. 103–208, § 2(i)(5), substituted a semicolon for the period at end of subpar. (L) and inserted after subpar. (L) the following: “except that subparagraphs (G), (H), (I), (J), and (L) shall not apply to agencies or associations described in paragraph (2)(A)(ii) of this subsection;”.
Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 103–208, § 2(i)(6), substituted “as a reliable authority as to the quality of education or training offered by an institution seeking to participate in the programs authorized under this subchapter” for “for the purpose of this subchapter”.
Subsec. (l)(2). Pub. L. 103–208, § 2(i)(7), substituted “institution” for “institutution” and “association, described in paragraph (2)(A)(i), (2)(B), or (2)(C) of subsection (a) of this section, leading to the suspension” for “association leading to the suspension”.
Subsec. (n)(1)(B). Pub. L. 103–208, § 2(i)(8), amended subpar. (B) generally. Prior to amendment, subpar. (B) read as follows: “site visits at both the accrediting agency or association and member institutions, including unannounced visits where appropriate.”
Amendment by Pub. L. 111–39 effective as if enacted on the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–315 (
Amendment by Pub. L. 105–244 effective
Amendment by Pub. L. 103–208 effective as if included in the Higher Education Amendments of 1992, Pub. L. 102–325, except as otherwise provided, see section 5(a) of Pub. L. 103–208, set out as a note under section 1051 of this title.
Section effective
Pub. L. 105–244, title VIII, § 804,
Ex. Ord. No. 14279,
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:
Accreditors routinely approve institutions that are low-quality by the most important measures. The national six-year undergraduate graduation rate was an alarming 64 percent in 2020. Further, many accredited institutions offer undergraduate and graduate programs with a negative return on investment—almost 25 percent of bachelor’s degrees and more than 40 percent of master’s degree—which may leave students financially worse off and in enormous debt by charging them exorbitant sums for a degree with very modest earnings potential.
Notwithstanding this slide in graduation rates and graduates’ performance in the labor market, the spike in debt obligations in relation to expected earnings, and repayment rates on student loans, accreditors have remained improperly focused on compelling adoption of discriminatory ideology, rather than on student outcomes. Some accreditors make the adoption of unlawfully discriminatory practices a formal standard of accreditation, and therefore a condition of accessing Federal aid, through “diversity, equity, and inclusion” or “DEI”-based standards of accreditation that require institutions to “share results on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the context of their mission by considering . . . demographics . . . and resource allocation.” Accreditors have also abused their governance standards to intrude on State and local authority.
The American Bar Association’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar (Council), which is the sole federally recognized accreditor for Juris Doctor programs, has required law schools to “demonstrate by concrete action a commitment to diversity and inclusion” including by “commit[ting] to having a student body [and faculty] that is diverse with respect to gender, race, and ethnicity.” As the Attorney General has concluded and informed the Council, the discriminatory requirement blatantly violates the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023). Though the Council subsequently suspended its enforcement while it considers proposed revisions, this standard and similar unlawful mandates must be permanently eradicated.
The Liaison Committee on Medical Education, which is the only federally recognized body that accredits Doctor of Medicine degree programs, requires that an institution “engage[ ] in ongoing, systematic, and focused recruitment and retention activities, to achieve mission-appropriate diversity outcomes among its students.” The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, which is the sole accreditor for both allopathic and osteopathic medical residency and fellowship programs, similarly “expect[s]” institutions to focus on implementing “policies and procedures related to recruitment and retention of individuals underrepresented in medicine,” including “racial and ethnic minority individuals.” The standards for training tomorrow’s doctors should focus solely on providing the highest quality care, and certainly not on requiring unlawful discrimination.
American students and taxpayers deserve better, and my Administration will reform our dysfunctional accreditation system so that colleges and universities focus on delivering high-quality academic programs at a reasonable price. Federal recognition will not be provided to accreditors engaging in unlawful discrimination in violation of Federal law.
(b) The Attorney General and the Secretary of Education shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, investigate and take appropriate action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American law schools that is advanced by the Council, including unlawful “diversity, equity, and inclusion” requirements under the guise of accreditation standards. The Secretary of Education shall also assess whether to suspend or terminate the Council’s status as an accrediting agency under Federal law.
(c) The Attorney General and the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall investigate and take appropriate action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American medical schools or graduate medical education entities that is advanced by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education or the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education or other accreditors of graduate medical education, including unlawful “diversity, equity, and inclusion” requirements under the guise of accreditation standards. The Secretary of Education shall also assess whether to suspend or terminate the Committee’s or the Accreditation Council’s status as an accrediting agency under Federal law or take other appropriate action to ensure lawful conduct by medical schools, graduate medical education programs, and other entities that receive Federal funding for medical education.
(i) accreditation requires higher education institutions to provide high-quality, high-value academic programs free from unlawful discrimination or other violations of Federal law;
(ii) barriers are reduced that limit institutions from adopting practices that advance credential and degree completion and spur new models of education;
(iii) accreditation requires that institutions support and appropriately prioritize intellectual diversity amongst faculty in order to advance academic freedom, intellectual inquiry, and student learning;
(iv) accreditors are not using their role under Federal law to encourage or force institution[s] to violate State laws, unless such State laws violate the Constitution or Federal law; and
(v) accreditors are prohibited from engaging in practices that result in credential inflation that burdens students with additional unnecessary costs.
(b) To advance the policies and objectives in subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary of Education shall:
(i) resume recognizing new accreditors to increase competition and accountability in promoting high-quality, high-value academic programs focused on student outcomes;
(ii) mandate that accreditors require member institutions to use data on program-level student outcomes to improve such outcomes, without reference to race, ethnicity, or sex;
(iii) promptly provide to accreditors any noncompliance findings relating to member institutions issued after an investigation conducted by the Office of Civil Rights under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.) or Title IX of the Education Amendments Act [sic] of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.);
(iv) launch an experimental site, pursuant to section 487A(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1094a(b)), to accelerate innovation and improve accountability by establishing new flexible and streamlined quality assurance pathways for higher education institutions that provide high-quality, high-value academic programs;
(v) increase the consistency, efficiency, and effectiveness of the accreditor recognition review process, including through the use of technology;
(vi) streamline the process for higher education institutions to change accreditors to ensure institutions are not forced to comply with standards that are antithetical to institutional values and mission; and
(vii) update the Accreditation Handbook to ensure that the accreditor recognition and reauthorization process is transparent, efficient, and not unduly burdensome.
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.