Issues concerning institutional accreditation, quality, and eligibility are considered, and some alternative plans are examined. One of the functions of accreditation is to determine which institutions are eligible to receive federal funds. It is suggested that neither the accreditation process nor the eligibility process confronts the issue of quality directly. The suggestion that the current voluntary accreditation system is not capable of identifying or ameliorating potential abuses leads to the conclusion that a new mechanism must be developed to protect the institution from unnecessary intrusion while it protects the state's interest in quality. The following alternative plans are considered: the Second Newman Report on national policy and higher education (1974), Harold Orlan's suggestion for accreditation, strengthening the present triad, massive disclosures, and a new federal-state partnership. It is concluded that a state academic review program can be most effective by fostering, encouraging, and nurturing a variety of self-policing arrangements within and among institutions. The agency would define standards, but direct state intervention would be the exception. Appended materials include criteria for recognition of national accrediting bodies and state agencies and categories and examples of potentially abusive institutional policies and practices included in institutional self-study forms. A bibliography is included. (SW)