Hugh Bonner, PhD, FASAHP

Greetings! I hope your semester is going well. It's amazing to think that we are already into October. In this President's column I would like to explain a little bit about how CAAHEP works because I know there is much confusion. Accredited programs communicate most directly with the Committee on Accreditation for their profession. But, ultimately, all programs are CAAHEP accredited. So, how does that work?

As the accrediting agency, CAAHEP delegates to its Board of Directors the final decision-making authority, as well as the responsibility for assuring that accreditation recommendations from the Committees on Accreditation (CoAs) follow due process and comply with the accreditation Standards. To do this, the CAAHEP Board meets six times per year to review accreditation recommendations brought forward by the different Committees on Accreditation. The process is thorough and fair, and procedures are in place to ensure the Board has adequate time to review the recommendations and ask questions from the recommending Committee on Accreditation, if necessary, to make an informed decision during the Board meeting.

When our CoAs send forward program recommendations that meet 100% of the Standards, they come to the Board with no citations. These programs are placed on the consent agenda, and the Board reviews the consent agenda and votes on these programs with one motion.

When the CoAs send forward programs that meet the Standards but with citations (deficiencies that need to be corrected, but do not alter the quality of the program), it is sometimes unclear on the circumstances causing the citations. Since the Board is ultimately responsible for the final oversight of all accreditation actions, and is responsible for any legal actions taken resulting from these decisions, at times the Board needs to go back to the CoAs to ask for additional background information on certain recommendations. If the Board needs greater insight to help us make the final decision on accreditation, we ask Theresa Sisneros, as the accreditation services liaison to the CoAs, to request more specifics surrounding the citations to clarify our decisions. Prior to the meeting, Theresa collects and provides the Board with the written responses received from the CoAs, so that Board members have an opportunity to review the data to establish an informed decision on the recommendation.

I want to assure the Committees on Accreditation and their volunteers that the Board's purpose in asking questions of our CoA partners is not to micro-manage the outstanding work done by the CoAs and their boards. We value the research and deliberations put into the CoAs' decisions, and we respect the integrity of their program reviews. We are simply trying to "close the loop," to understand the basis of the CoAs' decision, since the CAAHEP Board is ultimately responsible for all decisions on accreditation.

As the accrediting agency, it is ultimately the CAAHEP Board's responsibility to stand behind its decision on accreditation actions, and we appreciate our CoAs providing the details, responding to questions, and ensuring that the Board is making informed decisions.

At times the system may seem unwieldy. Frankly, at times it is! But it also assures our accredited programs that they will be treated in a consistent manner while being reviewed by experts in their field. It is the partnership between CAAHEP and the CoAs that makes this all possible.

Enjoy the coming autumn and, as always, feel free to contact CAAHEP with any questions or concerns.