Accreditors and schools warn Education Department rulemaking could cut federal aid for acupuncture programs
Loading...
Summary
Accreditors and education groups told the California Acupuncture Board that recent Department of Education negotiated rulemaking and new earnings metrics risk removing federal student aid for many acupuncture programs by mid‑2028, threatening enrollment, program viability and the profession’s pipeline.
Accreditors and school representatives warned the California Acupuncture Board on March 26 that federal higher‑education rulemaking could strip many acupuncture programs of eligibility for federal student aid, a change that could force program closures and reduce the number of new practitioners.
Jason Wright, director of accreditation services for the Accreditation Commission for Acupuncture and Herbal Medicine (AECOM), said the Department of Education’s negotiated rulemaking committees — known as RISE, AHEAD and AIM — have proposed earnings metrics that “are a flawed metric that actually penalizes self employment,” and that current calculations make it “highly likely you could see all of the acupuncture programs throughout The United States ineligible for direct federal student aid by July 2028.” Wright and AECOM director Mark McKenzie said the department’s approach pulls income from IRS and Social Security sources and compares it to bachelor‑level benchmarks, a method that undercounts income for self‑employed practitioners.
“About 70% of our graduates are self‑employed,” McKenzie said; because self‑employed clinicians report net income after business expenses, he said, the proposed metric will systematically understate earnings for many acupuncturists and leave programs unable to meet the federal thresholds.
The accreditors presented data showing the sector is already small and shrinking: AECOM staff reported roughly 45 accredited institutions, about 113 accredited programs overall and a national unduplicated headcount just under 6,000 students in 2025, with 41–42% of student headcount located in California. “If federal aid disappears,” McKenzie said, “enrollment will likely fall and some schools may close.”
Council of Colleges of Acupuncture and Herbal Medicine President Thomas Kuo told the board that the council and its coalition are actively submitting public comments and participating in the negotiated rulemaking process. He urged California board members to consider consistent safety standards — including broader adoption of the Council’s Clean Needle Technique (CNT) materials — to strengthen the profession’s case with regulators and lawmakers.
Wright told the board that program and living costs create a stark picture for students: recent AECOM analysis cited tuition ranges for masters programs from about $62,000 to $120,000 and doctoral packages in a comparable range; adding a conservative estimate of $3,000 per month for living expenses can push a student’s total educational investment toward the mid‑six figures over multi‑year programs. By contrast, accreditation‑reported median earnings used in the federal metrics often range from roughly $20,000 to $36,000 for many graduates — well below the roughly $60,000 per‑year benchmark the department is applying to graduate‑level programs.
Board members pressed both accreditors and council representatives on practical steps. Jason Wright said AECOM is revisiting standards to allow competency‑based approaches and to look for efficiencies without lowering safety; McKenzie and council speakers described coalition outreach to legislators and the Department of Education.
Board President Yongping Chen thanked the presenters and directed staff to track federal developments closely. The accreditors urged state boards and schools to coordinate on data collection and legislative advocacy, while also exploring program innovation to reduce cost without eroding clinical preparation.
