The National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) is on a clean-up drive after the recent “cash for accreditation scores” scandal. More than 1,200 assessors have been removed from its roster. According to media reports, the assessors were removed based on discrepancies in assessments, collegial feedback, and anomalies observed in their past evaluation reports. Plans to induct 100 new assessors are in the pipeline.

In addition, officials from NAAC have reviewed 400 public and private institutions and revised grades for nearly half of them.

The accreditation process evaluates institutions based on a Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) ranging from 1.51 to 4.00, assigning grades from A++ to C for a five-year period. Institutions that don’t make the cut get a D grade which indicates the institution has not been accredited. Ratings go a long way in helping performance and perception.

The Council is also working towards a major revamp. Two accreditation models are being created: a Binary or Basic Accreditation framework and a Maturity-Based Graded Levels (MBGL) model. The binary system will categorise institutions as “accredited” or “not accredited” based on 50+ minimum parameters. Institutions that pass the basic criteria will then be assessed under the MBGL framework, which will rank them on a scale from Level 1 to Level 5 based on sustained improvements.

One can only hope that the ambitious new models will succeed in restoring the integrity of the accreditation process.