Abstract
This paper examines four of the major accrediting bodies to identify commonalities in core elements for curriculum design and competency development. Some are detailed and specific; others focus on broad knowledge areas. CAHME is considering recommendations that will enhance the possibility for joint accreditation visits that streamline an accreditation process. Substantial overlap among the accrediting bodies is identified. Comparative guidelines and benchmarks for gauging their program’s success are viewed positively by a majority of programs that wish to be proactive in designing competency and outcome measures. Smaller programs that do not have the resources to offer separate courses for health and public affairs students will find the crosscutting themes encouraging, because they mean that the same program and resources can satisfy the same basic requirements of multiple accrediting bodies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.