The Trump administration ended the regional accreditation program in 2019. That change is now fueling further updates to the top approved providers.
A longtime member is leaving the Council on Accreditation Commissions, a group representing institutional accreditors. It’s a recent change that shows that appraisers are rethinking how they work with their peers and present themselves.
The Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities announced Friday that it is parting ways with C-RAC. Officials said in a news release that the move is intended to “focus” on the NWCCU’s “national conversation where it can have the greatest impact on the institutions it serves.”
NWCCU is one of seven institutional accreditors that comprise the C-RAC membership. (All seven were previously considered district attorneys before the Trump administration ended the district’s borders in 2019.)
Commission officials made the move as part of a broader strategic redesign that will show commitment to universities across the country despite the historic focus on the Northwest region.
“Although the commission has served colleges and universities in the Northwest and beyond for more than a century, its reach and relevance have grown beyond any regional boundary,” officials wrote in a news release. “The new ownership will honor that legacy while positioning NWCCU as the nationally appropriate, fellowship-focused authority it is today.”
NWCCU will remain a member of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
The NWCCU promised more details on the rebranding “in the coming months.” If the rebranding effort means a name change, it would be the second charter to make the move this year. On Thursday, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges announced that it would be rebranded to eliminate regional segregation. The accreditor will now be known simply as the Commission on Colleges and Universities, a change President Stephen L. Pruitt said is intended to reflect “who we are today and where higher education is going.”
NWCCU President Selena M. Grace echoed the same sentiment in Friday’s announcement.
“This is a time when we need to be clear about who we are and where we are going,” he said in a statement. “Everything we’re announcing today, our national engagement, our partnerships, who we are, reflects the same thing: an organization that grows with higher education, instead of reacting to it. We can’t wait to lead this era forward.”
While the rebranded COCU and Northwest Commission may be the first accreditors to drop their regional monikers, C-RAC was also rebranded earlier this year. More than six years after the Trump administration first demarcated the area, the C-RAC changed its name in January, trading the word “district” for “recognized.”
(The RAC did not respond to a request for comment Within Higher Ed.)
Trump administration officials criticized the term “district accreditation,” issuing a proposed interpretive rule in February to end the use of the term, which Education Department officials said in a news release created “artificial differences” and confusion. (The term appeared to confuse Education Secretary Linda McMahon last May.)
Under Secretary for Education Nicholas Kent has also criticized the use of the term in the past.
“Accreditors, higher education institutions, states, and professional licensing boards continue to cling to outdated terminology that prioritizes artificial excellence over actual student outcomes,” he said in a February news release about the translation law. “We appeal to those who are still clinging to the misleading words ‘regional approver’ to stop it immediately.”
The name changes come at a time of potential turmoil for the accreditation system.
Last month, an advisory committee advanced the Trump administration’s proposed authorization plan that would make it easier for new appraisers to gain federal recognition and impose new requirements on agencies, among other changes. ED officials have argued that the upcoming changes, which the department is working to finalize, will improve a broken system they see as a barrier to innovation and a drain on the agency’s resources. However, critics argue that the changes will reduce accountability and create bad actors in the sector.
