The ground rule of this hub: these materials support documentation — they help programs organize evidence and think through the standards. Only CCNE determines compliance; the official standards are at aacnnursing.org .
0 of 40 items checked
Print summary
Clear all
I Mission and GovernanceA reviewer checks: is the program's purpose clear, aligned, and governed?
The program mission is written, current, and congruent with the parent institution's mission.I-A Evidence: mission/goals/outcome statements; records of periodic review. Expected program outcomes are published, clearly differentiated by level (BSN/MSN/DNP/certificate), and shared with stakeholders.I-A Evidence: published outcome statements per program level. The program can show where and how professional nursing standards and the Essentials' domains, concepts, and competencies live in its mission and outcomes.I-B Evidence: Essentials crosswalk; copies of standards used. The needs of the identified community of interest are documented and reflected in mission and outcomes.I-C Evidence: community-of-interest input records. Written faculty expectations (appointment, promotion, tenure or equivalent) are congruent with institutional expectations.I-D Evidence: policies defining expectations for teaching, scholarship, service, practice. Governance documents show the program's clear authority over program affairs, with defined faculty and student roles — including distance-education students.I-E Evidence: bylaws, organizational charts, committee rosters and minutes. Academic policies (recruitment, admission, retention, progression, clinical requirements) are fair, equitable, published, accessible, and reviewed on a schedule.I-F Evidence: catalogs, handbooks, policy review records. Formal complaints are defined (student complaints at minimum) and records are maintained.I-G Evidence: complaint policy and log. Published documents are accurate — accreditation/approval status and licensure/certification eligibility claims use CCNE's exact prescribed disclosure language.I-H Evidence: website, catalogs, advertising materials.
II Institutional Commitment and ResourcesA reviewer checks: does the institution back the program with real resources?
The nursing-unit budget (current plus two prior fiscal years) shows resources sufficient to achieve the mission — reviewed periodically with a defined process.II-A Evidence: budgets; fiscal review records. Space, facilities, equipment, and supplies are sufficient, with currency, availability, and accessibility reviewed.II-B Evidence: facility inventories, space reports. Clinical sites are adequate, appropriate, and available — and the program has told students what is the program's job versus the student's job in securing placements.II-C Evidence: affiliation agreements; site-sufficiency documentation; placement-responsibility procedures. Academic support services (library, technology, distance-education support, advising) are sufficient and regularly evaluated.II-D Evidence: service inventories; evaluation records. The chief nurse administrator is an RN with a graduate degree in nursing (doctorate if a graduate program is offered), with authority comparable to peer unit heads.II-E Evidence: CV, job description, organizational chart. Faculty are sufficient in number; didactic faculty hold graduate degrees; clinical faculty meet the graduate-degree or baccalaureate-equivalency standard with purposeful oversight.II-F Evidence: CVs; qualification summaries; workload policies; course schedules. Preceptors are qualified, oriented, told their roles and performance expectations, and evaluated by the program.II-G Evidence: preceptor policies, orientation materials, evaluation records. Faculty professional development is supported, and clinical practice currency is maintained for faculty in roles that require it.II Evidence: professional-development records; currency documentation.
III Curriculum and Teaching-Learning PracticesA reviewer checks: does the education hold together, and can you prove it?
The curriculum is built from clear statements of expected student outcomes congruent with mission, goals, and the roles graduates are prepared for.III-A Evidence: curricular plans per track; outcome statements. The curriculum map demonstrates where and how each required professional standard's content, knowledge, and skills are incorporated — not just course titles.III-B–E Evidence: curriculum maps; syllabi showing standards incorporation. Sequencing is logical with a stated rationale; required hours are met (DNP 1,000 post-baccalaureate practice hours; NP 500 direct patient-care clinical hours; APRN core courses present).III-F Evidence: curriculum plan with sequencing rationale; clinical-hour documentation. Teaching-learning practices support the expected outcomes and fit the student population.III-G Evidence: syllabi, course materials, samples of student work. Planned experiences prepare students to care for individuals and populations with diverse life experiences, perspectives, and backgrounds.III-H Evidence: documented diversity-related learning experiences. Planned clinical practice experiences are evaluated by faculty, aligned to outcomes, and meet certification requirements where applicable.III-I Evidence: clinical documentation; clinical evaluation instruments. Planned experiences foster interprofessional collaborative practice.III-J Evidence: documented interprofessional experiences. Faculty — not preceptors — evaluate individual student performance; grading criteria are defined, communicated, and consistently applied.III-K Evidence: evaluation policies; grading criteria documentation. The curriculum and teaching-learning practices are evaluated at regularly scheduled intervals, and evaluation data are used for improvement.III-L Evidence: curriculum-evaluation records; minutes showing data-driven revisions.
IV Assessment and Achievement of OutcomesA reviewer checks: the full loop — data, interpretation, action, re-measurement.
A systematic, written, ongoing process determines program effectiveness — with defined data sources, timelines for collection/review/analysis, and periodic review of the process itself.IV-A Evidence: the written assessment plan; minutes showing periodic review. Program completion rates are 70% or higher (most recent year or three-year window), with any exclusions documented.IV-B Evidence: three-year completion tables, actual vs. expected. Licensure pass rates are 80% or higher for each campus/site and track — and the program has identified which calculation option it used.IV-C Evidence: pass-rate tables per campus/site and track. Certification pass rates are 80% or higher per examination.IV-D Evidence: pass-rate tables per examination. Employment rates are 80% or higher within 12 months of completion, with exclusions documented.IV-E Evidence: employment-rate tables. Outcome data are actually used: discrepancies between actual and expected outcomes inform deliberate, ongoing, faculty-engaged improvement — with owners, timelines, and re-measured results.IV-F Evidence: variance analysis; improvement-action records. Aggregate faculty outcomes are measured against expected levels (linked to the expectations set in I-D) and used for improvement.IV-G–H Evidence: aggregate faculty-outcome summaries. Program-defined "other" outcomes are measured against expected levels and used for improvement.IV-I–J Evidence: program-defined outcome reports.
Continuous obligations
Accreditation never closes: the ongoing paper trail.
Our read: the unchecked boxes are the agenda, not the verdict. Work them in this order: Standard IV's improvement loop first (it is the hardest to fake and the most persuasive), then the evidence matrix from the documentation toolkit , then everything else. An honest gap with an owner and a timeline is accreditation strength.
Self-assessment only. Your checks are saved on your device (localStorage) and never leave it. Key-element references are the hub's mapping — official standards: aacnnursing.org .