.png)
.png)
Based on ACEN commission actions and accreditation guidance documents, here are six tips for nurse administrators and faculty to implement to stay ahead on documenting evidence of compliance:
The most frequent area of non-compliance across multiple accreditation cycles is Standard 5 Outcomes — specifically, the lack of evidence that assessment data are "consistently analyzed and used in program decision-making." When faculty develop the Systematic Plan of Evaluation (SPE), they determine the intervals for collecting and analyzing assessment data for each end-of-program student learning outcome (EPSLO). It is critical for nurse administrators to ensure that these data are being collected and that the faculty have scheduled time to analyze the information they have collected.
The ACEN typically requires a minimum of three most recent years of available data for meeting minutes, budgets, EPSLOs, licensure exam pass rates, program completion, and job placement. The faculty may wish to begin the year by confirming they have complete data sets and identify any gaps that can be addressed before they become findings.
Non-compliance with Standard 2 Faculty frequently cites missing evidence that full-time and part-time faculty hold required educational qualifications. Annually, nurse administrators should verify their files as well as ensuring that all faculty (including those who assist with program administration) have updated transcripts, licensure, CVs, and performance evaluations. For many institutions, this may require the nurse administrator to work with Human Resources where these records are retained.
Programs commonly fall short in Standard 5 related to sharing the analysis of both program outcome data and EPSLO data (not just the outcome statements or aggregate data) with communities of interest. Nurse administrators may wish to schedule these data-sharing meetings early in the academic year and keep minutes as evidence.
Criterion 3.3 requires records showing that complaints and grievances received due process with evidence of resolution. Programs are flagged when this evidence isn't maintained. Nurse administrators and faculty should ensure there is a process, such as a tracking log to capture every formal complaint, the process followed, and the resolution. During a site visit, Peer Evaluators will review all complaint logs/files/records to verify adherence to the policy as well as ensuring due process and resolution.
Recent commission actions under the 2023 Standards and Criteria (Criterion 5.1) increasingly cite a "lack of evidence that faculty use a variety of appropriate direct outcome assessment methods for each EPSLO." At the beginning of the year, the faculty should review the assessment plan to confirm they are using multiple direct methods at or near the end of the program — not relying on a single examination or measure. Faculty should also assess the appropriateness and effectiveness of the methods they are using to assess the EPSLOs.
Use the ACEN Program Guidelines for organizing your evidence with intuitive labeling so Peer Evaluators can easily find supporting documentation. Current "snapshot in time" items (handbooks, syllabi, contracts, organizational charts) should be updated, and rolling data (meeting minutes, budgets, outcome data) should cover at least three years.
The overarching theme from commission actions is this: it's not enough to do the work — you must document that you did it. Programs that collect data but don't document the analysis and resulting decisions consistently receive non-compliance findings. Starting the academic year with these systems in place turns compliance documentation into a routine rather than a last-minute scramble before a site visit.