Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association: website rankings

Rankings, grades, and the most common failures for 9 Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association member websites, from ScanGov homepage scans.

  • Sites: 9
  • Last scan: 11/8/2026

Members of the Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association (NCAA Division III), from the NCAA membership directory. Conferences change membership every year; this list follows the directory's current academic year.

B 83

Average overall score of 8 fully scanned Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association member sites

9th

of 96 conferences, ranked by average overall score

8 of 9

Michigan intercollegiate athletic association member sites fully scanned. We couldn't fully scan 1, so they're listed without grades

B 85

Average overall score of all 2,687 fully scanned education sites

How Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association overall scores are distributed

Smoothed distribution of the 8 fully scanned Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association member sites, score 0 to 100. Height shows how many sites score near each value.

Distribution of 8 scores. The data table lists counts by score range.

  • Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association average
  • All education average
View the data table
How Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association overall scores are distributed
Score rangeSites
0 to 90
10 to 190
20 to 290
30 to 390
40 to 490
50 to 590
60 to 691
70 to 791
80 to 895
90 to 1001

Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association by overall grade, compared with all education sites

Share of fully scanned sites in each grade band. Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association: 8 sites. All education: 2687 sites.

  1. Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic AssociationA (90 to 100): 13% (1 sites)B to C (70 to 89): 75% (6 sites)D to F (below 70): 13% (1 sites)
  2. All education sitesA (90 to 100): 25% (659 sites)B to C (70 to 89): 73% (1,965 sites)D to F (below 70): 2% (63 sites)
  • A (90 to 100)
  • B to C (70 to 89)
  • D to F (below 70)
View the data table
Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association by overall grade, compared with all education sites
GroupA (90 to 100)B to C (70 to 89)D to F (below 70)
Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association13% (1)75% (6)13% (1)
All education sites25% (659)73% (1,965)2% (63)

Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association average score by indicator, compared with all education sites

Average of the 8 fully scanned Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association member sites, score 0 to 100. The comparison covers 2687 fully scanned education sites.

  1. Accessibility90All education: 91
  2. Botability89All education: 89
  3. Security86All education: 85
  4. Usability65All education: 68
  5. Readability50All education: 56
  • Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association
  • All education
View the data table
Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association average score by indicator, compared with all education sites
IndicatorMichigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association averageAll education average
Accessibility9091
Botability8989
Security8685
Usability6568
Readability5056

Top 3 Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association member sites by overall score

#1 in Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association · U.S. education rank 7

Hope College

A 94 overall

  • Accessibility A
  • Botability A
  • Security B
  • Usability A
  • Readability A

#2 in Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association · U.S. education rank 12

Adrian College

B 89 overall

  • Accessibility A
  • Botability A
  • Security C
  • Usability B
  • Readability F

#3 in Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association · U.S. education rank 14

Calvin University

B 87 overall

  • Accessibility A
  • Botability C
  • Security B
  • Usability A
  • Readability F

Most common failures by indicator

The check Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association member sites fail most often in each indicator. Each indicator page lists the top five.

Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association members by overall score

Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association members ranked by overall score
Rank Site Indicator grades Grade
1 hope.edu
Hope College U.S. rank 7
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade A
  • Readability grade A
A
2 adrian.edu
Adrian College U.S. rank 12
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade C
  • Usability grade B
  • Readability grade F
B
3 calvin.edu
Calvin University U.S. rank 14
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade C
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade A
  • Readability grade F
B
4 alma.edu
Alma College U.S. rank 19
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade D
  • Readability grade F
B
4 kzoo.edu
Kalamazoo College U.S. rank 19
  • Accessibility grade B
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade A
  • Usability grade F
  • Readability grade A
B
4 saintmarys.edu
Saint Mary's College U.S. rank 19
  • Accessibility grade B
  • Botability grade B
  • Security grade A
  • Usability grade D
  • Readability grade A
B
5 trine.edu
Trine University U.S. rank 22
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade C
  • Usability grade F
  • Readability grade A
C
6 albion.edu
Albion College U.S. rank 32
  • Accessibility grade B
  • Botability grade B
  • Security grade C
  • Usability grade F
  • Readability grade F
D
uolivet.edu
The University of Olivet
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We weren't able to fully scan your site. Status 999 -

About this data

ScanGov scans the homepage of each college and university site on our higher education list. Scores come from the checks in the ScanGov standards. Sites were scanned between 11/7/2026 and 11/8/2026. Each site's report shows its own scan date. A site counts as fully scanned when its homepage loaded and sent us its page content. Averages, grade shares, failure rates, and ranks use fully scanned sites only. We could not fully scan 1 sites. They did not respond, blocked the scanner, or sent no page content. They appear in the table without grades, with their scan status, and are left out of every figure. Grades follow the ScanGov grade scale. Rank follows the ScanGov ranking method. The full dataset, with every county's raw results, is in the ScanGov data repository.

Plans Demo