Offsite Degree Accrediting Body
Establishing the first accrediting body to certify university programs that prepare a workforce fluent in offsite design and delivery.
Vision
A national accrediting body for offsite construction will provide higher education with the governance, legitimacy, and tools needed to launch degree programs tailored to industrialized building. By defining shared standards for curriculum, faculty qualifications, and learning outcomes, the accrediting body ensures that tomorrow’s workforce is trained not only in design but also in manufacturing, logistics, digital integration, and systems-level delivery.
There is a (near) future where graduates across the U.S. enter the job market fluent in Configure-to-Order (CTO) methods, equipped to lead both factory floors and project teams. This structure mirrors successful models in architecture, engineering, and business education — where independent accrediting bodies serve as the backbone of professional formation.
Problem
Today, U.S. higher education has no accredited degree pathway for offsite construction. Programs in architecture, engineering, and construction management each cover fragments of the required knowledge but stop short of integrating manufacturing-informed practices. As a result, firms rely on ad hoc training or recruit from overseas markets. Students who seek specialized education cannot find it, while universities lack clear benchmarks to build it.
Without an accrediting body, degree programs risk being isolated experiments, lacking industry recognition, consistency, or pathways to scale. The absence of structured accreditation slows workforce development at the very moment when demand for housing, infrastructure, and resilient construction is most acute.
The Current Awkward Hybrid
At present, universities experiment informally. Some introduce electives in prefabrication, others partner with local factories for design-build studios, and a few create certificates or minors in construction technology. Yet these offerings remain peripheral, dependent on individual faculty champions or short-term grants.
Without accreditation, institutions cannot position these as core degrees. Students may graduate with exposure to modular construction, but without credentials that signal mastery to employers. Employers, in turn, cannot rely on consistent skillsets across graduates. This patchwork reflects the larger awkward hybrid of the industry: offsite methods advancing in practice, but academic structures lagging behind.
The CTO Marketplace
A dedicated accrediting body anchors offsite education in a coherent system. Universities can propose new degrees, guided by standards that define curriculum balance, manufacturing exposure, and digital integration. Industry leaders contribute directly, shaping requirements that align with evolving CTO practices.
Accreditation ensures quality, comparability, and continuous improvement. As programs proliferate, students gain portable, recognizable credentials, and firms gain confidence in their new hires. In this future, education no longer chases industry change — it helps lead it, producing graduates ready to steward the transformation from Engineer-to-Order to Configure-to-Order delivery.
| GRANT PROPOSAL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
Project Narrative
The project begins with a national task force (convened by the Center for Offsite Construction (CfOC) and the Modular Building Institute (MBI)), to define governance, scope, and bylaws. Under NYIT’s sponsorship, the body will be chartered as an independent, nonprofit accreditor. Standards will be drafted in collaboration with universities, manufacturers, regulators, and accreditation experts, and piloted with at least two institutions.
Following ANSI-compliant procedures, the body will issue its first standards within 18 months and review initial degree program applications shortly thereafter. Outreach will target architecture, engineering, and construction schools already exploring offsite content, offering them a structured pathway to upgrade their experiments into accredited degrees. The accrediting body will publish its standards, review programs, and conduct site visits — embedding manufacturing-informed design education into the U.S. higher education landscape for the first time.
Deliverables
- Governance documents, bylaws, and charter for the accrediting body.
- Draft accreditation standards covering curriculum, faculty, and program resources.
- Consensus-based review and comment process through national workshops.
- Publication of final standards, procedures, and application guidelines.
- Pilot review of at least three degree programs seeking accreditation.
- Public launch with conferences, media dissemination, and institutional outreach.
Budget
Budget
| Project Phase | Estimated Cost |
|---|---|
| Phase 1: Framing & Recruitment | $32,700 |
| Phase 2: Kickoff & Charge Authorship | $255,400 |
| Phase 3: Drafting & Convenings | $275,900 |
| Phase 4: Public Feedback & Revisions | $265,100 |
| Phase 5: Pilot Deployment | $280,100 |
| Phase 6: Final Ballot & Rollout | $310,100 |
| Total | $1,419,300 |
Key Outcomes
- Establishment of the first U.S. accrediting body dedicated to offsite construction.
- Adoption of accreditation standards by multiple universities within two years.
- Launch of degree programs producing the first cohorts of graduates with offsite-specialized credentials.
- Increased alignment between higher education and industry workforce needs.
- Recognition of offsite education within broader academic and professional accreditation ecosystems.
Assessment
Impact will be assessed through both process and outcome measures. Process evaluation includes the diversity and depth of stakeholder participation, the rigor of standards development, and the transparency of governance. Outcome evaluation focuses on adoption: the number of institutions applying for accreditation, the number of students enrolled in accredited programs, and employer recognition of credentials in hiring. Long-term assessment will track how accreditation strengthens industry capacity — measured by workforce growth, program replication, and the integration of CTO practices into mainstream education.
Key Partners
- Modular Building Institute (MBI): Convening industry leaders, supporting outreach.
- Accreditation Experts: Guiding procedures to align with ACCE, ABET, & NAAB precident.
- Universities (pilot institutions): Testing accreditation standards through early program applications.
- Industry Employers: Providing input to ensure standards align with workforce needs.
- Industry Organizations: NAHB, AIA, NAR, etc.
Progress
| Timeline | Description |
|---|---|
| Phase 1 | |
| July 2024 Senior Research Fellow Retreat | Application to ANSI to review CfOC Procedures, earn “Accredited Standards Author status, membership. |
| January 2025 Draft Model curriculum | (2) $10k donations. FullStack Modular & Nullary() Group |
| February 2025 Letter of Intent with MBI | Three stages: [1] CfOC shares model Procedures, Conditions & curricula. [2] Revue & comment. [3] Create a Task Force to study. |
| March 2025 Symposium The Future of Design and Delivery | Present accreditation idea, and model degree as a call to action in the offsite construction space. |
| June–August 2025 CfOC-MBI Task Force | Final Task Force Report (including financial models) |
| Phase 2 ← We are Here (at step in bold) | |
| July 2025 US Dept of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Grant | “US Offsite Construction Degree Accreditation Initiative,” application for $1.42M |
| September 2025 MBI Board Approval | MBI Board of Directors met to deliberate and endorse the Task Force Report. Go-ahead for NYIT contract. |
| November 2025 CfOC-MBI Contract | (1) Collaborate to form & steer an independent body. (2) Allocate surplus revenue. |
| December 2025 Form the Accreditation 501(c)(3) | MBI Board Member ready to complete paperwork. |
| Phase 2 | |
| Q1 2026 Draft Procedures & Criteria | Form a larger consensus committee to research, refine, & implement Task Force recommendations. |
| Q2 2025 Draft Model Curriculum | Another consensus committee to draft courses. Approach 17 Polytechnic Universities with Model Curriculum. |
| Phase 3 | |
| Q2 2026 Develop Accreditation Handbook and Standards | Draft operational policies, eligibility criteria, and performance benchmarks defining what qualifies a program for offsite accreditation. |
| Q2 2026 Stakeholder Meetings / Convenings | Meet with individual universities to both lay groundwork for new degrees, and refine standards language, address compliance issues, and ensure transparent evaluation mechanisms. |
| Phase 4 | |
| TBD Accredit Program Pilots | Test the accreditation with early adopters. |
| TBD Publish Draft Standards for Review | Distribute the preliminary accreditation framework for open comment by universities, accrediting bodies, and professional associations. |
| TBD Analyze Feedback and Refine Criteria | Incorporate stakeholder input; clarify definitions, assessment methods, and cross-credit pathways to strengthen academic rigor and industry alignment. |
| Phases 5-6 | |
| TBD Scale Accreditation Pilots at Several Schools | Scale partner institutions to widen tests of standards through simulated reviews and real curriculum evaluation. |
| TBD Revenue & Additional CfOC Research | Begin dedicating accreditation revenue to CfOC research projects |