Your NAAC Grade Expires in 2027.
Here's What You Should Be Doing Now.

An IQAC Director at an autonomous college in Karnataka called us in March 2026. Her institution received NAAC A grade in 2022. The grade expires in 2027. She had one question: "How do we reapply?"

The answer was more complicated than she expected. New RAF applications closed on June 30, 2024. The Binary portal hasn't opened yet. MBGL hasn't launched. Her institution is in a gap — the old pathway is closed, the new pathway isn't available, and her grade is counting down.

She isn't alone. Thousands of institutions across India are in the same position: holding RAF grades that expire in 2026 or 2027, unable to apply under the old system, waiting for a new system that hasn't been operationalised. The question isn't academic. It's urgent.

The transition rules — what NAAC has actually said

Based on NAAC's executive committee decisions and the February 2025 announcement, here is what has been officially communicated about the transition:

RAF applications closed June 30, 2024. No new applications under the Revised Accreditation Framework are accepted after this date. Institutions that had IIQA or SSR applications in progress under RAF were given the option to continue under RAF (with online/hybrid peer team assessments) or switch to Binary Accreditation once available.

Cycle 2+ institutions retain their current grade until Binary and MBGL are officially operational. If your institution is in Cycle 2 or above under RAF, your existing grade remains valid — even if its 5-year validity period would otherwise have expired — until the new framework is in place.

Institutions whose grades expire between July 1, 2024 and the MBGL launch date are eligible for a validity extension of up to 3 months after MBGL launches. This means the grade doesn't lapse immediately upon expiry — it gets extended until 3 months after MBGL becomes available, giving the institution time to apply under the new framework.

High-performing institutions may skip Binary and apply directly for MBGL assessment. Institutions with strong RAF performance and demonstrated digital readiness can potentially bypass the Binary tier and enter MBGL directly. The eligibility criteria for this pathway have not been fully defined.

The short version: your grade won't lapse while you wait. NAAC has provided transitional cover. But the extension isn't indefinite — it's tied to the MBGL launch date, which hasn't been announced.

What this means for different institutions

If your grade expires in 2026-2027 and you're in Cycle 2+

Your grade is extended until the new framework launches plus 3 months. You're protected for now. But "protected" means your grade is temporarily valid — it doesn't mean you're prepared for whatever comes next. When Binary or MBGL opens, institutions will need to apply within the window. The ones that spent the waiting period building their evidence base will apply confidently. The ones that waited passively will scramble.

If you're a first-cycle institution

You have the option to apply for Binary Accreditation when the portal opens. The six mistakes first-cycle institutions make apply equally under Binary — possibly more so, since AI-based assessment is less forgiving than a peer team when evidence is missing or inconsistent.

If your IIQA or SSR was in progress under RAF

You had the option to continue under RAF or switch to Binary. If you continued under RAF, your assessment proceeds through online (colleges) or hybrid (universities) peer team evaluation. If you switched, your RAF process was closed and you'll apply under Binary when available.

If you were never accredited

You apply for Binary Accreditation once two batches of students have graduated or after MBGL is launched — whichever comes first. The minimum existence requirement remains: at least two graduated batches or six years of operation.

The 3 things institutions get wrong during the wait

Mistake 1: Treating the extension as infinite. The validity extension is tied to a specific event — the MBGL launch. It's not an indefinite postponement. When MBGL launches, the 3-month clock starts. Institutions that haven't prepared by then have 3 months to get their evidence in order. For most institutions, 3 months is not enough.

Mistake 2: Stopping IQAC activity. The most common pattern we see: institutions whose grades are "safe" for now stop holding IQAC meetings, stop generating ATRs, stop collecting feedback data, stop submitting AQARs. When they eventually apply — whether under Binary or MBGL — they'll have a gap in their quality improvement record. A gap in IQAC documentation is evidence of absent quality assurance, not evidence of a framework transition.

Mistake 3: Assuming Binary will be easier. A simpler outcome (Accredited / Not Accredited) does not mean a simpler process. The proposed Binary framework includes AI-based data validation, cross-portal verification against AISHE and NIRF databases, and digital-first evidence requirements. Institutions whose data isn't clean, whose AISHE returns aren't current, or whose evidence is paper-based will face challenges regardless of which framework they apply under.

What the waiting period is actually for

The gap between RAF closing and Binary/MBGL launching isn't dead time. It's preparation time. The institutions that use it well will be the ones that transition smoothly. The ones that waste it will be the ones that post on social media asking "what do we do now?" when the portal finally opens.

The preparation that matters during this period is framework-agnostic: data accuracy, AISHE consistency, IQAC functioning, digital evidence readiness, and cross-portal alignment. These are not Binary-specific or MBGL-specific activities. They are the institutional fundamentals that every framework evaluates, regardless of structure.

The specific question — "are we ready for whatever comes next?" — requires an institution-specific assessment. Which of your data sources are inconsistent? Where are your IQAC documentation gaps? How much of your evidence is digital? What does your AISHE return say versus what your internal records show? Those answers are different for every institution.

Edhitch

Accreditation & Ranking Intelligence · NAAC · NBA · NIRF · 12 Years · 100+ Institutions