The ways in which the regional accrediting commissions are responding effectively in the evaluation of rapidly changing postsecondary education institutions are described. Differences between the roles of the accrediting commissions and the state agencies are examined, and ways to develop more cooperative relationships are suggested. The primary means by which the accrediting commission determines institutional effectiveness and provides this public assurance is through the accreditation process, a program of periodic evaluation. Among the developments that have occurred in the regional accrediting commissions to be responsive to changing conditions are the following: examination and revision of the commissions' processes for institutional evaluation, with more specific criteria for accreditation and clearer information; serious consideration of the due process components of the review process; sharpening of annual reports required of institutions so that changes of a limited nature can be discovered and monitored; and development of sequential evaluation processes for cooperative efforts across regional boundaries. Areas of continuing concern include: the evaluation of off-campus programs in another region, the evaluation of institutions with external graduate degrees, the specificity of standards or criteria, and the evaluation of institutions perceived as nontraditional. Among the differences between regional accrediting commissions and state agencies are the following: the focus of the regional accrediting commission is on the institution, while the focus of the state agency is the wise expenditure of state resources; the regionals treat public and private institutions alike; and accrediting commissions are private nongovernmental associations of institutions. Five ways to develop cooperative relationships between state and accrediting agencies are suggested. (SW)