The Bermuda Triad: Where Accountability Goes to Die

The U.S. has many of poor- and under-performing colleges, where millions of students are paying and borrowing a lot. Unfortunately, most students do not know that schools are underperforming until it is too late. The higher education industry has coasted on the reputation of the nation's most prestigious schools. Nationally, only about 42 percent of students complete a four-year degree in four years--with rates that are much lower for Black (22 percent) and Hispanic (33 percent) students--and fewer than one in three complete a certificate or associate degree within one-and-a-half times the length of time it should take them. Given these mediocre outcomes for millions of postsecondary students each year, it is reasonable to ask: Who is supposed to be protecting students and taxpayers? In such a diffuse, varied system, gatekeeping responsibilities are not simple. So Congress cobbled together a "program integrity triad" to share the responsibilities, pulling in existing entities--designed in a different time and for different purposes--to fill that role as it expanded federal dollars to more colleges. In general, accrediting agencies are approved by the U.S. Department of Education to bear responsibility for the academic quality of the colleges they accredit; the states are tasked with consumer protection; and the federal government, via the U.S. Department of Education, certifies institutions to be eligible for taxpayer-financed financial aid and oversees their administration of those funds. However the system of shared accountability devolves into a debate, with no one member of the triad willing to take serious action against an institution of higher education that falls short until other members of the triad have stepped up. This report examines the problems of the triad of accountability and ends with recommendations for strengthening U.S. Department of Education's oversight.