State governments serve an important quality assurance role by certifying that postsecondary institutions are legitimate entities with the capacity to offer valid credentials to students. In recent years, precipitous and high-profile campus closures, predatory and manipulative student recruitment tactics, rising student loan debt burdens, and concerns with educational quality have raised alarms about the stringency and enforcement of state consumer protection responsibilities (Bruckner, 2020; Ness et al., 2021). These concerns are especially heightened for proprietary institutions, which are not only more likely to engage in predatory practices (Hutchens & Fernandez, 2021) but also enroll a greater proportion of low-income, first generation, and racially minoritized students (Libassi, 2018) and have worse student success and employment outcomes (Yuen, 2019). The state's consumer protection role is primarily operationalized through three corresponding processes: initial authorization, reauthorization, and reporting. Authorization is the first formal act an institution takes to legally offer postsecondary credentials and serves as the foundation for additional quality assurance functions. Reauthorization or renewal occurs at a defined time (e.g., annually, every five years) after initial authorization to ensure that existing institutions are meeting their educational missions and serving the best interests of students in the state. Reporting is unique from renewal, often occurring on a separate cycle and mandating additional data submission or updates. Failure to adhere to reauthorization and reporting guidelines can result in revocation of an institution's authorization to operate. These three processes differ among states and institutional types, with the most stringent policies generally falling on for-profit and career institutions. Data collected during the reauthorization process are extensive and comprehensive, encompassing institution governance, consumer protections, student outcomes, and academics. In addition to providing state authorizers with the information necessary to ensure that institutions are operating effectively and with the best interest of students in mind, reauthorization data also provides information to prospective students and their families. The requirements to publicly post academic and student outcomes data allow students to make informed enrollment decisions and may incentivize institutions to improve their performance. Researchers from SHEEO and the University of Georgia developed a systematic 50-state inventory of state reauthorization processes and reporting requirements, building on the existing inventory of initial authorization (Ness et al., 2021). The reauthorization inventory is a crucial addition to the relatively sparse data and research on state authorization and allows researchers to explore the variation, stringency, and effectiveness of state reauthorization policies. The lack of literature on authorization persists despite the longstanding central role state authorizers have played in the regulatory triad, taking the form of a small number of empirical research papers (see Ward & Tierney, 2017; Onwuameze, 2017; Burns, et al., 2022) and reports from state associations, membership organizations, and nonprofit thinktanks (see Harnisch, et al., 2016; Tandberg, et al., 2019; Kelly, et al., 2015). Importantly, no research to date has explored the effectiveness of state authorization processes in fulfilling the state's consumer protection role and supporting student success. This report seeks to fill the gaps in existing literature and contribute to the field's knowledge through an exploratory analysis of the correlation between state reauthorization policies and student academic and financial outcomes.