The programs and language institutions listed below were denied accreditation; denials may be appealed. Each appeal is considered by an independent appeals board, whose decision is final and may not be challenged in any other CEA forum. Following a final denial action, CEA is required to prepare a brief statement summarizing the reasons for denial of accreditation to a program or institution. The statement is forwarded to the site, which has the option to provide a responsive comment on CEA's statement within 30 days of a final denial action (of which the appeal decision is one type). The CEA statement, along with any comment from the site, is posted on the CEA website and forwarded to the U.S. Department of Education, the appropriate office at the Department of Homeland Security, and licensing bodies.

April 2017 Commission Actions

Appeals update:  Original Denial Action August 2016

• American Language Academy - Miami (denial upheld, denial final) - statement and comment

________________________________________________________________________________________

 August 2016 Commission Actions

Denied continued accreditation (appealable)

• American Language Academy Miami- Miami, FL (institutional)- under appeal

________________________________________________________________________________________

December 2014 Commission Actions

Denied continued initial accreditation (denial final)

• Intensive English Program, Institute for Health Education - statement
• LIC/LISMA Language Center/ Manhattan - statement
• LIC/LISMA Language Center/ Long Island - statement
• LIC/LISMA Language Center/ Palisades Park - statement
• LIC/LISMA Language Center/ Queens - statement

Appeals Update: Original Denial August 2014

• Internexus Salt Lake City, UT, USA - (denial upheld, denial final) - statement

________________________________________________________________________________________

August 2014 Commission Actions

Denied accreditation (denial final)

• Albert Career School, PA, USA - statement
• International Language Training Institute, NY, USA - statement

Denied re-accreditation (appealable)

• Internexus Salt Lake City, UT, USA - under appeal

Denied continued initial accreditation (denial final)

• Internexus Provo, UT, USA - statement

Appeals Update: Original Denial April 2014

• INTERLINK Language Center at West Chester University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA - (denial upheld, denial final) - statement

________________________________________________________________________________________

April 2014 Commission Actions

Denied continued accreditation (appealable)

• INTERLINK Language Center at West Chester University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA - under appeal

Appeal Updates: Original Denial December 2013

• California English School, CA, USA - (denial upheld, denial final) - statement and comment
• Washington Language Institute, MD, USA - (denial upheld, denial final) - statement and comment

Appeal Updates: Original Denial October 2013

• American Language Center, PA, USA - (denial upheld, denial final) - statement and comment
• New York General Consulting, NY, USA - (denial upheld, denial final) - statement

Accreditation is a process by which experts in a particular field determine common standards and choose to regulate themselves according to those standards. In order to become accredited, especially in the field of education, a program or institution participates in a voluntary process of peer review, designed to improve and assure the quality of the program or institution. Within the higher education community, oversight for education programs and institutions is the purview of accrediting agencies, state regulatory agencies, and the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education.

The goals of accreditation in education include the following:

• Advancing standards and promoting excellence
• Publicly recognizing programs and institutions that meet accepted standards
• Assuring the quality of programs and institutions to the public
• Providing a means of ongoing self-assessment and continuing education for programs and institutions
• Providing an objective means for reviewing the quality of education and education services

CEA Standards

Benefits of Accreditation

An English language program or institution, its administrative and teaching staff, and its students benefit directly from involvement in a comprehensive assessment of how effectively the program or institution meets its stated mission. By evaluating the quality of its programs and services with respect to the CEA Standards for English Language Programs and Institutions, which were drafted and approved by professionals in the field, the program or institution can gauge its effectiveness against benchmarks set by the profession. Through the on-going annual reporting and reaccreditation process, programs and institutions continue their commitment to high quality.

CEA policies and procedures and its review process are based on U.S. Department of Education requirements for recognized accrediting agencies and the good practices of education accrediting agencies. The CEA Standards for English Language Programs and Institutions are the basis of the review process.

The steps in the process follow:

1. Application for eligibility: A site completes the application form and submits required documents, including curricular documents, a list of faculty and staff with training and experience, information about student services, and the administrative structure. CEA staff reviews the documentation to ensure that the program can be reviewed based on the areas of the CEA standards.
2. Workshop: CEA invites a site that meets eligibility requirements to attend a 2-day workshop. Participants learn more about the standards, receive guidance on how to complete the self-study report, and get an overview of the site visit and review for accreditation decision by the Commission. Workshops are held each year at TESOL conventions and twice yearly at the CEA office.
3. Self-study plan: One month after the workshop, the site submits a plan for its self-study. The plan includes a timeline for the self-study, a target date for the site visit, a list of committees and members. CEA staff provides feedback on the plan.
4. Self-study report: The CEA self-study is a reflective activity. A site explains how it believes it meets each of the 44 CEA standards, documents compliance, evaluates how well it meets the standard, and recommends areas of improvement, if any. CEA provides a template for the report as well as requirements for submission.
5. Site visit: A three-person team reads the self-study report prior to conducting a 3-day on-site visit. The visit includes class visits, a tour of facilities, and interviews with administrators, faculty, and students in order to verify the contents of the self-study report. The team applies the CEA Standards in its review process. The review team report includes its findings related to each of the 44 CEA standards. The site receives the report and writes a response to the findings.
6. Review by the Commission: The 13-member CEA Commission uses the self-study report, the review team report, the response from the site, and a review of finances to make its accreditation decision. The Commission judges the site based on its compliance with the CEA Standards. For initial accreditation, the Commission may grant 1-year or 5-year accreditation. For re-accreditation, the Commission may grant 1-year or 10-year accreditation. Sites that receive 1-year accreditation must respond to requirements before being considered for continued accreditation.

The accreditation process promotes continuous improvement during the process of the self-study as well as through feedback in the review team report and from the Commission. Follow-up and annual reporting ensure that improvement continues throughout the period of accreditation.

For more information on the CEA accreditation process, see the CEA Policies and Procedures