Higher Education: Issues Related to Law School Accreditation	 
(08-MAR-07, GAO-07-314).					 
                                                                 
In order to participate in certain federal programs, such as	 
federal student financial aid, postsecondary institutions must be
accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the Department 
of Education (Education). Accreditation ensures that schools	 
provide basic levels of quality in their educational programs,	 
and Education recognizes those agencies it concludes can reliably
determine the quality of education provided by the schools and	 
programs they accredit. Since 1952, Education has recognized the 
American Bar Association (ABA) as an accrediting agency for law  
schools. ABA accreditation is important to the 195 law schools it
accredits because it allows their graduates the flexibility to	 
take the Bar exam in any jurisdiction in the United States. The  
Department of Education requires that all recognized accrediting 
agencies periodically reapply for continued recognition. The	 
Secretary of Education's accreditation advisory group, the	 
National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and	 
Integrity (NACIQI), considered the ABA's most recent application 
for continued recognition in December 2006. The ABA was 	 
originally scheduled for review in December 2005, but Education  
postponed it twice based on the large volume of public comments  
that had to be reviewed, as well as concerns about the ABA's	 
diversity standard. To address Congressional interest in these	 
issues, we answered the following questions: (1) What is	 
Education's process for recognizing accrediting agencies? (2)	 
What is ABA's process for accrediting law schools? (3) What	 
concerns have been raised about the ABA's accreditation process? 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-07-314 					        
    ACCNO:   A66667						        
  TITLE:     Higher Education: Issues Related to Law School	      
Accreditation							 
     DATE:   03/08/2007 
  SUBJECT:   Educational standards				 
	     Higher education					 
	     Institution accreditation				 
	     Law schools					 
	     Legal education					 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-07-314

   

     * [1]GAO's Mission
     * [2]Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

          * [3]Order by Mail or Phone

     * [4]To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
     * [5]Congressional Relations
     * [6]Public Affairs

Report to Congressional Requesters

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

March 2007

HIGHER EDUCATION

Issues Related to Law School Accreditation

GAO-07-314

Contents

Letter 1

Appendix I Briefing Slides 5
Appendix II Comments from the Department of Education 28
Appendix III Comments from the American Bar Association 30

Abbreviations

ABA American Bar Association
Education
Department of Education
NACIQI National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

March 8, 2007

The Honorable George Miller
Chairman
The Honorable Howard P. "Buck" McKeon
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Education and Labor
House of Representatives

The Honorable Stephanie Tubbs Jones
House of Representatives

In order to participate in certain federal programs, such as federal
student financial aid, postsecondary institutions must be accredited by an
accrediting agency recognized by the Department of Education (Education).
Accreditation ensures that schools provide basic levels of quality in
their educational programs, and Education recognizes those agencies it
concludes can reliably determine the quality of education provided by the
schools and programs they accredit. Since 1952, Education has recognized
the American Bar Association (ABA) as an accrediting agency for law
schools. ABA accreditation is important to the 195 law schools it
accredits because it allows their graduates the flexibility to take the
Bar exam in any jurisdiction in the United States.

The Department of Education requires that all recognized accrediting
agencies periodically reapply for continued recognition. The Secretary of
Education's accreditation advisory group, the National Advisory Committee
on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI), considered the ABA's most
recent application for continued recognition in December 2006. The ABA was
originally scheduled for review in December 2005, but Education postponed
it twice based on the large volume of public comments that had to be
reviewed, as well as concerns about the ABA's diversity standard. To
address your interest in these issues, we answered the following
questions: (1) What is Education's process for recognizing accrediting
agencies? (2) What is ABA's process for accrediting law schools? (3) What
concerns have been raised about the ABA's accreditation process?

We used the following methodologies to develop our findings. To understand
Education and ABA processes related to accreditation, we reviewed relevant
laws and regulations, ABA accreditation standards, and documents
pertaining to the ABA's application for renewed recognition. We also
interviewed Education officials, ABA representatives, and four law school
administrators. To identify the concerns that have been raised about ABA's
accreditation process, we reviewed third-party comments submitted to
Education in advance of the NACIQI meeting. We also attended the December
2006 public meeting that NACIQI held to consider ABA's application for
continued recognition, and reviewed the transcript of the meeting.
Finally, we analyzed ABA data on first-year law school enrollment and
found the data sufficiently reliable for our purposes. We conducted our
work between October 2006 and February 2007 in accordance with generally
accepted government auditing standards.

We briefed your staff on results of our analysis on February 9, 2007. This
report formally conveys the information provided during that briefing. In
summary, we reported the following findings:

           o Education has established criteria for recognizing an
           accrediting agency and has mechanisms in place to assess
           compliance with the criteria. Agencies found to be in compliance
           with Education's criteria can be approved for up to 5 years. There
           are also mechanisms in place to defer or deny an agency's
           recognition.

           o ABA has established standards for approval of law schools and
           has mechanisms in place to assess compliance with the criteria.
           Law schools are eligible for provisional approval when they
           demonstrate that they are in substantial compliance with each of
           the standards, and must demonstrate they are in full compliance to
           be fully approved.

           o Some Education staff, law school administrators, and other
           third-parties have raised concerns about ABA's accreditation
           process, particularly with respect to the transparency and
           consistency of the process, as well as the legality of its
           diversity standard, which requires schools to demonstrate they are
           reaching out to underrepresented groups. Based on concerns that
           ABA is not fully in compliance with regulatory provisions that
           govern accreditation, Education and NACIQI have recommended that
           the Secretary of Education renew ABA's recognition for a period of
           18 months, rather than the maximum period of 5 years.

We provided copies of a draft of this report to the Department of
Education and the American Bar Association for review and comment. In
written comments, Education provided technical comments and
clarifications, which we incorporated as appropriate. In particular,
Education clarified that its recommendation suggested that NACIQI require
ABA to submit interim reports on ABA's compliance with all criteria for
accreditation recognition, not just the diversity standard as stated in
the draft. We revised our report accordingly. However, we note that the
recommended interim reporting requirements focus heavily on the diversity
standard. Education also expressed concern about our characterization of
why NACIQI excluded from its recommendation the additional reporting
requirements related to diversity, as Education had recommended. Our
report correctly notes that NACIQI did not think additional reporting
related to the diversity standard was necessary because Education had not
identified any instances in which ABA inconsistently applied the diversity
standard or provided evidence that law schools had been compelled to
violate existing state laws. However, Education thought our report should
also note that NACIQI did not address Education's broader concern that ABA
had not demonstrated that it has effective controls in place to prevent
inconsistent application of the standard as required by the recognition
criteria. While Education is correct that NACIQI did not discuss this
concern specifically, it addressed these concerns by affirming Education's
recommendation to limit ABA's recognition to a period of 18 months.
Education's comments appear in appendix II.

The ABA said that the report was generally balanced and fair, and provided
technical comments and clarifications, which we incorporated as
appropriate. ABA expressed concern about our statement that it uses
thresholds on bar passage and attrition rates to prompt further review.
ABA emphasized that these thresholds are not used to determine whether or
not a school is in compliance with the accreditation standards. We revised
our report to clarify this issue. The ABA also provided updated data on
law school enrollment that was not available to us at the time we
conducted our briefing. Finally, with respect to the background
information the report provides on non-ABA approved law schools, the ABA
said the number of such law schools is much greater than indicated in our
draft report. Specifically, ABA identified a number of California law
schools that were not included on the list of non-ABA approved law schools
that we obtained from the Law School Admission Council (LSAC). While the
information from LSAC is not exhaustive, it provides the most complete
source of readily-available data on non-ABA approved law schools.
Additionally, because graduates of these law schools can sit for the bar
exam in California, our overall message remains the same--graduates of
many non-ABA law schools can take the bar exam in the state where they
earned their degree. ABA's comments appear in appendix III.

We are sending copies of this report to relevant congressional committees,
the Secretary of Education, and other interested parties and will make
copies available to others upon request. In addition, this report will be
available at no charge on GAO's Web site at www.gao.gov .

If you or your staff has any questions about this report, please contact
me at (202) 512-7215 or [email protected]. Contact points for our Offices of
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page
of this report. Key contributors to this report include Jeff Appel
(Assistant Director), Debra Prescott (Analyst-in-Charge), Summer Pachman,
John Mingus, and Jim Rebbe.

George A.
Scott Acting Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security
Issues

Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Education

Appendix III: Comments from the American Bar Association

(130264)

GAO's Mission

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To
have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."

Order by Mail or Phone

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail:
[email protected] Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202)
512-7470

Congressional Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
D.C. 20548

Public Affairs

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548

*** End of document. ***