I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4795 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require accrediting agencies 

and associations to comply with due process throughout the accreditation 

process, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2006 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require 

accrediting agencies and associations to comply with due 

process throughout the accreditation process, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. RECOGNITION OF ACCREDITING AGENCIES 

4 AND ASSOCIATIONS. 

5 (a) DUE PROCESS.—Paragraph (6) of section 496(a) 

6 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

7 1099b(a)) is amended to read as follows: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4795 IH 

1 ‘‘(6) such agency or association shall apply pro2 cedures throughout the accrediting process, includ3 ing evaluation, interim sanction, and withdrawal or 

4 termination of accreditation proceedings, that com5 ply with due process, including the right to— 

6 ‘‘(A) adequate specification of the agency’s 

7 accrediting requirements; 

8 ‘‘(B) written notice of deficiencies at the 

9 institution of higher education or program 

10 being examined and a reasonable time period, 

11 expressly set forth in the notice, to correct the 

12 deficiencies; 

13 ‘‘(C) advance notice of and an opportunity 

14 for a hearing by any such institution before the 

15 agency’s decision making body prior to the 

16 agency’s final consideration of imposition of an 

17 adverse action; 

18 ‘‘(D) appeal any adverse action by the 

19 agency against any such institution to an inde20 pendent and impartial arbitration panel ap21 pointed jointly by the agency and the institution 

22 and conducted at the location of the institution; 

23 ‘‘(E) appeal, at a minimum, the adequacy 

24 of the evidence supporting the adverse action 

25 decision, the adequacy of the agency’s compliVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:22 Feb 22, 2006 Jkt 049196 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H4795.IH H4795

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
3 

•HR 4795 IH 

1 ance with its own policies and procedures, and 

2 the extent to which the decision of the agency 

3 was tainted by bias or prejudice of any agent 

4 or official of the agency; 

5 ‘‘(F) representation by counsel for any 

6 such institution; 

7 ‘‘(G) an arbitration panel decision that 

8 may affirm or reverse, but not modify, the deci9 sion appealed by the institution; and 

10 ‘‘(H) an allocation of the costs of the ap11 peal that requires the agency and institution to 

12 each bear its own attorney, witness, and other 

13 costs of presentation of its case at the arbitra14 tion hearing and shifts the cost of the arbitra15 tion panel and any court reporter to the losing 

16 party; 

17 except that the Secretary may issue regulations to 

18 further define due process requirements as needed to 

19 protect accredited institutions, but may not by regu20 lation reduce due process requirements available to 

21 accredited institutions, whether the due process is 

22 required under this paragraph or another provision 

23 of law or regulation;’’. 

24 (b) ADDITIONAL CRITERIA.—Section 496(a) is 

25 amended— 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
4 

•HR 4795 IH 

1 (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph 

2 (7); 

3 (2) by striking the period at the end of para4 graph (8) and inserting a semicolon; and 

5 (3) by adding at the end the following new 

6 paragraphs: 

7 ‘‘(9) if an agency or association conducts an as8 sessment of an institution’s governing board— 

9 ‘‘(A) such assessment shall consistently 

10 apply the accreditation standard, to the great11 est extent possible, to any State-appointed re12 ceiver, special trustee, or similar interim gov13 erning authority, until such time as governing 

14 authority is returned to the regular governing 

15 board; and 

16 ‘‘(B) such agency or association shall not 

17 terminate accreditation solely on the ground 

18 that the institution is under interim manage19 ment of a State-appointed receiver, special 

20 trustee, or similar governing authority unless 

21 the agency or association determines that there 

22 are other deficiencies at the institution that 

23 provide grounds for termination, and that, after 

24 providing due process required by this section, 

25 the interim governing authority has not corVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:22 Feb 22, 2006 Jkt 049196 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H4795.IH H4795

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
5 

•HR 4795 IH 

1 rected such deficiencies within a reasonable pe2 riod of time; and 

3 ‘‘(10) such agency or association, and any offi4 cer or subdivision of such agency or association that 

5 makes accreditation recommendations to its deci6 sion-making board, shall conduct meetings open to 

7 public observation and comment and shall, at least 

8 7 days before the time of any such meeting, post 

9 and distribute its meeting agenda electronically and 

10 otherwise to the public, and, for purposes of this 

11 paragraph— 

12 ‘‘(A) the term ‘meetings’ includes all meet13 ings, hearings, appeals, deliberations, and votes 

14 on accreditation matters regarding any edu15 cational institution or on accrediting standards, 

16 policies, or procedures; and 

17 ‘‘(B) the Secretary shall issue regulations 

18 to implement this paragraph.’’. 

19 (c) RECOGNITION OF STATE ACCREDITING AGEN20 CIES.—Section 496(a)(3)(B) (20 U.S.C. 1099b(a)(3)(B)) 

21 is amended by striking ‘‘on or before October 1, 1991’’. 

Æ 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS