Supporting Statement

for

Request for OMB Approval

The Secretary\'s Recognition of Accrediting Agencies

A. [Justification]{.underline}

1.  The Secretary of Education is required to publish a list of
    nationally recognized accrediting agencies that the Secretary
    determines to be reliable authorities regarding the quality of
    education or training offered by the institutions or programs they
    accredit. In determining whether a specific agency should be
    recognized, the Secretary evaluates the agency for compliance with
    the criteria for recognition contained in regulations. The
    collection of information is necessary for the Secretary to evaluate
    the agency\'s compliance with each of the criteria and to monitor
    its continued compliance with the criteria during any period of
    recognition granted.

> The authority for collecting this information is contained in the
> Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA), and 34 CFR part 602.
>
> The Department of Education (the "Department") is requesting OMB
> review and approval of the following paperwork sections in the
> regulations:
>
> \(a\) [Information accrediting agencies must submit to ED]{.underline}
>
> §602.30, which describes how an agency applies for recognition.
>
> §602.26, which describes an agency's responsibilities for notifying
> the Secretary and others about its accrediting decisions.
>
> §602.27, which describes other information a recognized agency must
> provide the Secretary.
>
> \(b\) [Information accrediting agencies must collect from the
> institutions or programs they accredit]{.underline}
>
> §602.16, which describes the accreditation standards an agency must
> have.
>
> §602.24, which describes certain information an institution must
> submit to its accrediting agency.
>
> The Department is also requesting OMB review and approval of two
> record retention requirements: those in §602.15(b) and those in
> §602.23(a). Section §602.15(b) requires an agency to keep full and
> accurate records of its last two full accreditation or
> preaccreditation reviews of each institution or program, as well as
> its decisions with respect to all preaccreditation and accreditation
> actions, including all adverse actions. Section §602.23(a) requires an
> agency to maintain and make publicly available certain written
> materials, including its accreditation standards, policies, and
> procedures, a list of each accredited institution or program, and the
> names of its policy and decision-making bodies. An agency would
> normally make all of these written materials available to its
> accredited members any way, most often through its web site, so this
> requirement does not represent an added burden on agencies.
>
> Finally, the Department is requesting OMB review and approval of the
> third-party disclosure requirements contained in §602.23(e) and
> §602.28(e). Section §602.23(e) requires an agency to provide for the
> public correction of incorrect or misleading information an accredited
> institution or program might release about its accredited status, the
> contents of a site team report, or the agency's accrediting actions
> with respect to the institution or program. This requirement does not
> represent any measurable burden on agencies because institutions and
> programs in good standing with their accreditor rarely release
> incorrect information about their accredited status while institutions
> in bad standing are quickly removed from the rolls.
>
> Section §602.28(e) requires agencies to share, upon request of other
> recognized accrediting agencies and State approval agencies,
> information about the accreditation or preaccreditation status of an
> institution or program. This requirement does not represent any
> measurable burden on agencies because it rests upon the request of
> another agency. Usually, these requests are quite infrequent.

2\. The purpose and use of the information collection requirements for
which the Department is requesting OMB approval are discussed below
under each section of the regulations.

> [§602.30]{.underline}. The Secretary uses the information collected
> under §602.30 to determine if an accrediting agency applying for
> either initial or renewed recognition complies with the criteria for
> recognition. This section contains two specific information
> require­ments: a statement of an agency\'s requested scope of
> recognition and an agency-prepared analysis of the agency\'s
> compliance with each of the criteria for recognition contained in
> subpart B of the regulations, together with supporting documentation
> for the agency\'s claim of compliance with the criteria.
>
> The statement of requested scope of recognition is essential for two
> reasons. First, it identifies the types of accrediting activities the
> agency conducts that Department staff must evaluate to determine
> whether the agency complies with the criteria for recognition. Second,
> it identifies the possible range of institu­tions and/or programs an
> agency may accredit that may then seek eligibility to participate
> either in the Title IV, HEA student financial aid programs or in other
> programs administered by the Department or other Federal agencies.
> When the Secretary grants recognition to an agency, the Secretary
> defines its approved scope of recognition, as required by section
> 496(n)(3) of the HEA. The scope granted may be narrower than that the
> agency requested, depending on the results of Department staff's
> evaluation of the agency's compliance with the criteria.
>
> The agency-prepared analysis of the agency's compliance with each of
> the recognition criteria contained in subpart B of the regulations and
> support­ing documenta­tion constitute a significant information
> collection require­ment. The information is essential, however, if the
> Secretary is to evaluate the agency\'s compliance with each of the
> criteria for recognition. The Department­ has significantly reduced the
> magnitude of the information collection require­ment by allowing
> agencies to provide simple assurances that they are in compliance with
> the majority of the criteria, together with documentation (e.g.,
> copies of already-existing standards or policies related to the
> particular requirement) that supports their statement of simple
> assurance.
>
> While the information collection requirement contained in §602.30 is
> significant, an agency that has been granted recogni­tion by the
> Secretary must submit the information only when it seeks renewal of
> recogni­tion, which normally takes place about every five years.
>
> [§602.26]{.underline}. The information collected under §602.26 is used
> by the Department and the other entities that have oversight
> responsibilities for institutions and programs to assist them in
> making informed decisions about those institutions and programs. For
> example, if the Department learned that an institution's accreditation
> was in jeopardy, the Department might monitor the institution's
> participation in the Title IV programs more closely to make sure that
> the institution continued to meet its Title IV program
> responsibilities.

Section 602.26 implements section 496(a)(7) of the HEA and requires
agencies to notify the Secretary, the appropriate State licensing or
authorizing agency, the appropriate accrediting agencies, and the public
of their accrediting decisions. Agencies typically meet two or three
times a year to make accrediting decisions and already prepare a list of
those decisions for publication in their newsletters. Thus, the burden
to provide a copy of the list to others is relatively small.

> [§602.27]{.underline}. Section 496(l) of the HEA requires the
> Secretary to limit, suspend, or terminate an agency's recognition
> before the end of its recognition period if the Secretary determines
> that the agency does not comply with the criteria for recognition or
> is not effective in its performance with respect to those criteria.
> The Secretary uses the information collected under §§602.27(a) through
> 602.27(d) to monitor an agency's compliance with the criteria during
> its recognition period. The information in §§602.27(a) through
> 602.27(c) is to be collected on an annual basis, the information in
> §602.27(d) only when the agency makes any changes to its standards,
> policies, or procedures that affect its scope of recognition or
> ability to comply with the criteria for recognition.
>
> The information collection requirements in §§602.27(e) and 602.27(f)
> relate to section 487(a)(15) of the HEA, which authorizes the
> Secretary, accrediting agencies, and other oversight bodies to share
> information about the eligibility of any institution that participates
> in the Federal financial assistance programs the Department
> administers under Title IV of the HEA. An agency must submit the
> information in §602.27(e) only if the agency has reason to believe an
> institution it accredits is failing to meet its Title IV program
> responsibilities or is engaged in fraud or abuse. The information is
> necessary to assist the Secretary in ensuring that institutions
> participating in Title IV meet their Title IV responsibilities and do
> not engage in fraud or abuse when administering Title IV funds.
>
> ­An agency is required to submit the information contained in
> §602.27(f) only upon the request of the Secretary and only when the
> information is needed to assist the Secretary in resolving problems
> related to the Title IV eligibility of an institu­tion or program
> accredited by the agency.
>
> [§602.16]{.underline} Section 496(a)(5)(i) of the HEA requires an
> agency to have standards that address the record of student complaints
> received by, or available to, the agency concerning an institution or
> program it accredits, while section 496(a)(5)(j), which was added to
> the HEA as a result of the Higher Education Amendments of 1998,
> requires the agency to have standards that address the record of an
> institution's compliance with its Title IV program responsibilities,
> based on information the Secretary provides the agency. Sections
> §602.16(a)(1)(ix) and §602.16(a)(1)(x) of the regulations implement
> these requirements. These provisions do not actually require agencies
> to collect the information; agencies must simply maintain a record of
> the information provided to them from other sources (e.g., students
> and ED).
>
> [§602.24]{.underline} Section 496(c) of the HEA imposes two
> information collection requirements on agencies that are reflected in
> §602.24. First, §602.24(a) re­quires institutions that establish a new
> branch campus to submit a business plan for that campus to the agency
> for approval. Second, §602.24(c) requires institutions that enter into
> a teach-out agreement with another institution to submit that
> agreement to the agency for approval.

3\. The Department has implemented a web-based, electronic information
collection system that allows agencies to submit their applications for
recognition electronically. The system allows agencies to attach
supporting documentation for a petition in electronic formats. If some
of the material an agency needs to submit with its application is
available on the agency's web site, the agency can inform Department
staff of that point, along with the web address.

4\. The information collected is not obtained through any other means
within the Federal government. The information on agencies is collected
only through the accrediting agency recognition process the Department
administers.

5\. Collection of this information does not involve small businesses or
other small entities.

6\. Collecting the information contained in §602.30 less frequently than
once every five years, the maximum recognition period permitted by law,
would severely jeopardize the integrity of the recognition process by
not allowing the Secretary to obtain the information needed to make a
determination regarding an agency's compliance with the criteria for
recognition within the timeframe set by law.

> Collecting the information contained in §602.26 less frequently than
> after each decision meeting an agency holds would allow institutions
> that lose their accreditation to continue to draw down Title IV funds,
> even though they become ineligible to participate in Title IV programs
> when they lose their accreditation, simply because the Department
> would have no way of knowing they were no longer eligible.
>
> Collecting the information contained in §602.27 less frequently than
> once a year would limit the effectiveness of the Department\'s
> procedures for monitoring accrediting agencies during their
> recognition period.

7\. The Department's electronic submission system significantly reduces
the volume of paper agencies must submit. Department staff reviews the
agency submission and enters the analysis into the electronic system.
Members of the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and
Integrity (NACIQI) have access to the electronic system to conduct their
reviews in preparation for the Committee hearing. The electronic system
also streamlines the Department's record keeping and archiving
responsibilities. Agencies that lack the capacity or decline to use the
electronic system may still submit using the old procedures by providing
an original and three copies of its application for recognition,
although the agency must submit only one copy of some of the more bulky
items, like a sample institutional self-study. The reason the Department
needs the original and three copies is related to the review of the
agency's application for recognition by the National Advisory Committee
on Institutional Quality and Integrity. Two members of this committee
serve as principal readers of an agency's application, and Department
staff sends each of them a complete copy of the agency's application in
advance of the Advisory Committee meeting so they can review it and be
prepared to ask the agency questions at the meeting. As the information
is sometimes quite voluminous, the Department does not require the
Advisory Committee members to bring the material with them to the
meeting, but instead makes the third copy available to the members at
the meeting. The original is used by Department staff in its analysis of
the agency's petition and is maintained in the official Department files
for the agency.

> The recordkeeping requirement in §602.15(b), which requires agencies
> to keep complete and accurate records of their last two full
> accreditation or preaccreditation reviews of each institution or
> program, is necessary because the HEA requires­ the Secretary to
> conduct a thorough and independent evaluation of each agency seeking
> recognition. Part of this evaluation includes a review of actions
> taken by an agency over an extended period of time to determine what
> (if any­thing) the agency has done to follow up on a program review by
> the Department at one of its schools that shows significant Title IV
> violations, an IG audit report that shows significant Title IV
> compliance issues, or other information Department staff provides the
> agency under §602.16(a)(1)(x). In order to accomplish its evaluation
> of an agency, Department staff must have access to all documentation
> supporting the agency\'s grant of accredi­tation to an institu­tion or
> program over an extended period of time. The requirement is also
> necessary for the Department to be able to verify an agency\'s claims
> of strengthening its accrediting policies, procedures, and practices
> over time.

1.  Following negotiated rule making, the proposed regulations for
    Secretarial recognition of accrediting agencies were published in
    the Federal Register on June 25, 1999. The Department received 26
    public comments on the proposed regulations. However, none of the
    public comments addressed issues of cost or burden related to
    information gathering. The final regulations with summaries of
    public comment were published in the Federal Register on October 20,
    1999, Vol. 64, No. 202, page 56612.

> A notice regarding the approval of this information collection was
> posted in the Federal Record on November 10, 2005. The second notice
> is anticipated to be posted on January 15, 2006.

9\. The Department does not provide any payment or gift to an
accrediting agency that applies for recognition.

10\. While most of the information collected here is available to the
public as provided under the Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information
Act, there is one section of the regulations that promises
confidentiality to agencies that apply for recognition. Specifically,
§602.30(c) states that the Secretary does not make available to the
public any confidential agency materials examined by Depart­ment
personnel as part of the evaluation of an agency\'s application for
recognition.

> The basis for this assurance of confidentiality is that it is the
> Department\'s longstanding policy to require access to confidential
> agency files to evaluate an agency\'s claim of compliance with the
> criteria for recognition but to respect that agency\'s policies on
> confidentiality of institutional records by not releasing those
> records to the public.

11\. There are no questions of a sensitive or private nature in the
information to be collected.

12\. The number of currently recognized accrediting agencies is 63. Each
of those agencies must provide the information requested in §602.30 at
the end of each recogni­tion period, which for most agencies is every
five years. Recognized agencies must submit the information in §§602.26
and 602.27 each year.

> The estimate of the burden on agencies to collect this information is
> as follows:
>
> Burden to complete application for recognition \[§602.30\]:
>
> 63 agencies x 80 hours 5040 hours
>
> (amortized over 5 years) 1008 hours
>
> Burden for annual data collection and third-party disclosures
> \[§§602.26, 602.27, 602.23(e) and 602.28(e)\]:
>
> 63 agencies x 1 hour 63 hours
>
> The estimate of the burden on agencies to complete an application for
> recognition was calculated on the basis of information provided by
> agencies regarding how long it took them to prepare the information
> requirements under the current regulations. The Department believes
> this estimate is reasonable.
>
> The estimate of burden on agencies for the annual data collection is
> simply the time required for them to collect already-existing
> documents and reports of decision meetings and mail them to the
> Department. The estimate of burden on agencies for third-party
> disclosures is negligible. The estimate of these two burdens combined
> is one hour per agency per year.

The cost to each agency for collecting the information to prepare an
application for recognition is estimated as follows:

> Salary for professional staff: \$ 3,000
>
> Salary for clerical staff: \$ 2,000
>
> Data compilation, Xeroxing, mailing: [\$ 500]{.underline}
>
> \$ 5,500
>
> Note that the above cost estimate should be amortized over the
> recognition period, which for most agencies is five years. Thus, the
> estimated annual cost to an accrediting agency to prepare an
> application for recognition is \$1,100. The estimated annual cost to
> the 63 agencies currently recognized is \$69,300.

13\. Other than postage, there is no cost to any agency for collecting
the information required to be submitted to the Department on an annual
basis because all of this information is already collected by the
agency.

> There is no cost to agencies to collect the information required in
> §§602.16 and 602.24 as this is information institutions, on their own
> initiative, must report to the agency.

14\. There is no direct cost to the Federal government to collect the
information agencies must submit under §§602.30, 602.26, and 602.27.
There is, however, a significant cost to analyze the information
collected under these sections. The Department maintains a staff of 8
people to administer all aspects of the accrediting agency recognition
process, including analyzing agencies' applications for recognition and
monitoring recognized agencies throughout their recognition period. The
total cost of salaries and benefits for these individuals is
approximately \$1,105,000 annually, while annual travel expenses related
to their independent evaluation of agencies' compliance with the
criteria for recognition are approximately \$50,000 and other incidental
expenses (such as supplies) are approximately \$5,000.

> In addition to these costs, there is an annual cost of approximately
> \$50,000 associated with the meetings of the National Advisory
> Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity, which Congress
> established to advise the Secretary on the recognition of specific
> accrediting agencies.

15\. There are no changes in the information reported in item 14 of the
OMB form 83-I. The information reported in item 13 of the OMB form 83-I
is changed to reflect an increase in the number of recognized agencies
from 61 to 63.

16\. The Department does not formally publish any of the information it
collects from accrediting agencies. However, Department staff does
prepare an analysis of an agency's compliance with the criteria for
recognition, based in part on the information that the agency submits in
its application for recognition under §602.30. That analysis is
presented to the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality
and Integrity when that body meets to review the agency's application.
Copies of the analysis are available to the public at the Advisory
Committee meeting and thereafter, upon request.

17. The Department seeks approval not to display the expiration date for
    OMB approval of the information collection because the Department
    does not use a form to collect the information. The Office of
    Postsecondary Education/Accreditation and State Liaison currently
    displays and will continue to display the OMB Control Number for
    this collection on the website used by accrediting agencies to
    submit recognition petitions.

18. No exception is requested.

B. [Collections of Information Employing Statistical
Methods]{.underline}

> The collection of information does not employ statistical methods.

Date: January 11, 2006