Can alumni continue to use former program titles or certifications on resumes and licenses after designation removal?

1. Institutional branding often updates alumni designations — “use the current name”

Many universities instruct staff, communications teams, and alumni relations offices to refer to former students using the institution’s current public name and acronym rather than legacy names; Boston University’s brand guidance explicitly replaces past program acronyms (e.g., CAS, Questrom) when identifying alumni who attended under older names ^[1]. That guidance implies institutions expect alumni communications and official university materials to present the new designation as the authoritative label for alumni identity ^[1]. This is a communications and brand-management position, not a legal ruling about what an individual may place on a résumé or credential.

2. Federal program lists treat designations as active eligibility markers, not alumni identity

For grant, reporting, and eligibility purposes, the U.S. Department of Education maintains matrices and statutory lists that reflect which institutions or programs currently hold specific designations (for example, HSIs, AANAPISIs, HBCUs) and which are eligible for program waivers or Title III/V grants ^[2]. Those lists are operational and change over time; they determine institutional eligibility for federal programs and grants rather than personal claims by alumni ^[2]. If a program loses a federal designation, that may affect institutional reporting and funding but the Department’s materials do not address resume wording for past graduates ^[2].

3. Practical difference: branding rule vs. proof for licensing or compliance

Brand guidelines like BU’s govern how the university and its agents should present alumni and legacy program names ^[1]. Licensing boards, employers, or credentialing bodies, however, set their own rules about proof of training, certification validity, or permissible professional titles — and those rules may rely on current program accreditation or recognized designations ^[2]. Available sources do not report on specific professional boards’ policies or legal prohibitions concerning alumni listing former program titles; that gap means you should check the relevant licensing or certifying authority for explicit restrictions because institutional branding guidance ^[1] and federal eligibility lists ^[2] do not resolve personal résumé choices.

4. Reputation and honesty: the journalistic bottom line

When sources disagree, the consistent guidance is to avoid misleading statements. University style guides instruct use of the current institutional name for public-facing references to alumni ^[1], while federal lists show that designations used for funding and program eligibility are time‑sensitive ^[2]. For an alumnus, the safest and most defensible practice is to list the credential or program exactly as it was awarded (dates and original program title) and, when relevant, add the current institutional name or parenthetical clarification — and to keep documentation accessible for employers or licensing boards that may request verification. Available sources do not provide explicit model language or a legal rule requiring one approach over another ^{[1] [2]}.

5. What to do next — checks that matter

• Review your alma mater’s alumni/brand guidance to see whether they require use of the current school/program name in official alumni communications ^[1].
• Consult the licensing board, certifying body, or employer to learn whether they require current program accreditation or permit listing legacy program titles with dates and documentation (available sources do not mention these specific board policies).
• If a federal designation affected program funding or accreditation while you attended, check the Department of Education’s eligibility matrices to confirm the institution’s status at that time and whether that may affect verification ^[2].

6. Competing perspectives and hidden incentives

Universities push current naming to protect brand cohesion and donor relations ^[1]. Government listings focus on compliance and funding eligibility, which can create incentives for institutions to retain or regain designations because losing them can affect grants ^[2]. These different incentives explain why an institution might insist on current names in public materials even while alumni legitimately hold credentials earned under an earlier program title.

If you want, tell me the specific institution, program, and licensing board involved and I will check the sources you provide or search for any board rules you want examined (available sources do not include board-level policies on this issue).