Established AuD Programs

Academic institutions that currently have ongoing, established AuD programs may apply under this category for accreditation. These are formal audiology programs that have graduated at least one cohort of students and may have received an accreditation status from another agency. These audiology programs are usually located within a college or school of a university that has been regionally or nationally accredited.

This page outlines the following steps from section 5 and section 7 of the ACAE Accreditation Manual and the ACAE Accreditation Standards for programs seeking Accreditation Status.

Access Manual PDF

Access Standards PDF

Eligibility for Established AuD Programs Seeking Accreditation

For an AuD program to be eligible for accreditation by the ACAE, a university department, school or college of audiology must:

Demonstrate the feasibility of an AuD degree program in terms of demographics, public need, student interest, and availability of clinical facilities;
Be part of a nonprofit institution that is devoted primarily to education and regionally accredited or nationally recognized by the Council for Higher Education (CHEA) or the United States Department of Education (USDE);
Be legally authorized by the appropriate authorizing agency in the state in which the program is located to confer the AuD degree upon graduates in recognition of their successful completion of study in Audiology; and
Have appointed a Program Director qualified as specified in ACAE’s Accreditation Standards (Standard # 6) responsible for the administration of the AuD degree program.

ACAE will not grant Accreditation Status to a program if the program’s host institution is subject to:

A pending or final action by a state agency to suspend, revoke, withdraw, or terminate the institution’s legal authority to provide post-secondary education;
A pending or final action brought by an accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education to suspend, revoke, withdraw, or terminate the institution’s accreditation or pre-accreditation; or
A pending or final action brought by an accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education to place the institution on probation or an equivalent status unless there is good cause, consistent with ACAE’s Standards, to grant accreditation.

Requirements for Established AuD Programs Seeking Accreditation

Submit an online expression of interest form here.
Submit a letter of intent signed by the appropriate institutional administrator overseeing the audiology program and the program director through a document upload in the expression of interest form. The letter of intent should be brief but must include the following: a declaration of intent of the institution to seek ACAE accreditation.
Completion of online application and self-study components (as described below).
Fees – See Fee Schedule for program Accreditation Status below.

Initial Accreditation Fees

Accreditation fees include a non-refundable deposit, application fee, and site visit fee.

Non-Refundable Deposit Submitted with Letter of Intent	$2,000
Application Fee This fee is due prior to the initiation of the online application and self-study	$3,000
Site Visit Due prior to the site visit	$5,000
Total Fee:	$10,000

Online Accreditation Platform

ACAE uses Zengine, a web-based accreditation platform, for all stages of the accreditation process. Programs access the “submission portal” to complete application forms, profiles, evaluate compliance with ACAE standards and upload supporting documents. The Evaluation Team uses the “review portal” to view each program’s submittal and evaluate compliance with ACAE standards. The Evaluation Team’s report is moved back to the “submittal portal” for the Program’s review and response. A platform user guide is available to programs and evaluators throughout the process.

Primary Application and Profiles

The program will enter data (e.g., demographic, applicant, student, graduate, clinical instruction, resources, faculty), as well as complete profiles for each faculty, clinical educator, clinical site, committee and course in the curriculum.

Self-Study

The self-study is a key component in the ACAE accreditation process and involves the stakeholders of the audiology program in “looking at itself” for the purpose of self-improvement and long-term planning. It engages members of the community in a critical review of the program's mission, goals and objectives; considers the impact of societal and economic changes affecting the program; and identifies programmatic strengths and weaknesses in the achievement of intended outcomes. This is accomplished primarily through evaluating how the program measures itself in compliance with the ACAE Standards.

Moreover, the self-study report orients the evaluation team to the program. The self-study describes the audiology program’s mission, goals, objectives, and the extent to which they are being met; resources; its constituencies; its physical plant; and other factors. The self-study should enable the evaluation team to obtain a deep understanding of the program and should provide the site team substantial knowledge of the program’s faculty, administrators, students, financial integrity, and the intricacies of its governance.

Guidelines for the Self-Study Process

The following recommendations will help foster the constructive attitudes and participation essential for an effective self-study:

Program administration should effectively communicate the reasons for the self-study to all concerned constituencies.
In order for faculty and students to participate enthusiastically in the process, the program administration must reinforce the concept of continual self-improvement represented by the self-study process. The program administration can bolster morale by helping to create “ownership” of the process.
Adequate human, technical, and financial resources should be assigned for the self-study process. Program administration sends a clear message to faculty and students that the self study is an important institutional and programmatic priority when adequate resources are allocated to assure its timely and effective completion. In a web-based system, this approach should be considered an ongoing activity.
All appropriate constituencies should be involved in the self-study process. Inclusiveness facilitates a more accurate assessment of many issues. Along with the entire program faculty, the participation of students, alumni, support staff, trustees, employers, and representatives from the community in which the program is located helps develop a view of the program being studied that benefits both the program and all involved individuals.
The self-study should be undertaken and continued with an openness and willingness to identify problems and concerns. Program administration should realize and make it clear to those involved that the self-study is an important opportunity for institutional planning and improvement. One valuable benefit of the self-study process is the identification of weaknesses and potential solutions.
The process should identify the accomplishments and positive elements of the program. This is an opportunity to highlight the accomplishments of the program to date and indicate the direction and future achievements available to the program.
Adequate time should be provided for local administrative review before the self-study is submitted to ACAE. Review and comment on the self-study by the appropriate sector of the institutional community, such as the President, Provost, Dean of Academic Affairs or specific College Dean or other institutional senior administrator/consultant, helps to affirm that the compiled data represent the views of the faculty, students, and staff. A final review also helps to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the data.

Site Visit

The ACAE Site Evaluation Team reviews the information contained in the self-study and verifies that the information provided in the self-study is accurate. The team’s responsibility is to study the information provided by the education program and the requirements for accreditation. Afterwards, they are to carry out an objective and impartial assessment of the quality of the AuD program seeking initial or continuing accreditation. Prior to the selection of the Site Evaluation Team for a specific institution, the Program Director is provided with a list of potential evaluators from the ACAE Team pool. The Program Director has the option to strike the names of up to two individuals who are perceived to have a conflict of interest with the program.

The selected team will be composed of three members from the pool, representing both academic and clinical interests. Members of the Board of Directors and ACAE staff may serve in the ACAE Evaluation Team pool. A Team Chair is designated by the ACAE and serves as the official spokesperson for the team during the evaluation process.

The ACAE Site Evaluation is divided into two parts:

Pre-Site Visit

The Pre-Site Visit is an online evaluation that usually takes up to four weeks. Under special circumstances discussed between the program and the ACAE, the pre-site visit could take longer, i.e., 1-2 months. The Site Evaluation Team interacts online and through virtual conference calls in its initial review of the program’s submission. Questions or specific statements about Standards are clarified and/or answered. At the end of this first part of the evaluation, the team has a thorough working knowledge of the program and submits a report that evaluates the program’s compliance with ACAE Standards. Additional evidence may be requested to be uploaded prior to the site visit, or to be provided during the site visit. The primary purpose of the physical on-site visit is to validate and verify what they have reviewed.

Site Visit

The Site Visit is a two-and-a-half-day opportunity for the Site Evaluation Team to physically observe the academic program that was described in detail (via the Application, Profiles and the Self-Study) over the course of the previous year. It is a time to interact with the Program Director, faculty, administrators, students, preceptors, employers, alumni, and other relevant staff. This in-person overview of the program and its professional presence in the institution allows the Site Evaluation Team to make a recommendation about the program in its Site Visit Report.

Site Visit Report

During the site visit, the team begins to write a report of its findings. On the final morning of the site visit, highlights of the report, including program strengths and areas of concern, are reviewed with the Program Director and then shared with members of the administration and faculty in a final conference. The completed report is submitted to the ACAE office within a few days and made available to the program for review.

ACAE Standards Compliance Categories

Each of the forty ACAE Standards is awarded an overall qualitative status by the ACAE. This status reflects the evidence or lack of evidence that is presented in a program’s self-study for each standard. The four qualitative status designations are outlined below:

Strength

In-Compliance

A standard is designated In-Compliance when the program has demonstrated that it satisfactorily meets the ACAE expectations of compliance for a specific standard.

In-Compliance (with Non-Mandatory Suggestions): If a standard is designated to be In-Compliance, but there are indications of possible improvements beyond this status, suggestions for improvements may be offered by the ACAE. These suggestions are not mandatory and do not need to be followed by the program. A clear statement about nonmandatory suggestions is specifically made by the ACAE Site Evaluation Team during the exit conference at the conclusion of the site visit and in the final Site Visit Report. The program is told that the suggestions are part of ACAE’s continuous quality improvement (i.e., value-added benefit) process.

Partial Compliance

A standard is designated in Partial Compliance when the program has demonstrated approximately 80% - 90% compliance, but needs to achieve 100% compliance. The program must submit a Plan of Action or Progress Report to the ACAE within a specified period of time, i.e., three to six months, demonstrating that it has complied with the standard or has developed a plan and is making progress in that direction. The program has up to two years to come into compliance, as determined by the ACAE. The timeline is provided in the ACAE Final Board Report.

Non-Compliance

A standard is designated in Non-Compliance when the program has demonstrated it is 100% out of compliance. A program applying for initial accreditation that receives a Non-Compliance on any standard will be Denied accreditation. A program applying for reaccreditation that receives a Non-Compliance on any standard will be placed on Probationary Accreditation. See related paragraphs on page 17 in the ACAE Accreditation Manual for corrective action timelines.

After a fourteen-day period, in which the program has the opportunity to correct any factual errors in the report and respond to the findings and recommendations contained in the report, the ACAE office staff forwards the Site Visit Report to the Program Accreditation Review Committee.

Program Accreditation Review Committee

A committee of three members appointed by the ACAE Board of Directors makes up the Program Accreditation Review Committee. The committee reviews the program’s submittal and the visiting team’s report and presents its recommendation to the ACAE Board at its next regularly scheduled meeting. Additionally, the Board reviews the report and program response and then, by majority vote, decides on an accreditation status for the program.

ACAE Board Decision

The Board will review the total educational effectiveness of the program in light of the program’s specific mission and objectives to determine compliance with the ACAE Standards. Following a majority vote of the Board, the ACAE Chair and Executive Director prepare an Accreditation Status Notification letter, which is the official correspondence regarding the Board’s decision. The Board Report is sent to the chief operating officer of the institution and the Program Director within four weeks and contains comments on the program’s compliance with the ACAE Standards, its strengths and weaknesses, and recommendations for program enhancement and the ACAE website is updated accordingly.

Accreditation Decision Categories

Accreditation

A classification granted to a program indicating that the program meets the ACAE Standards for Accreditation. This classification indicates that the program has no areas of Non-Compliance (deficiencies or weaknesses) that compromise the educational effectiveness of the total program. This is usually granted for a ten-year term. If the program is given a status of Accreditation, with one or more of the Standards identified as Partial Compliance, the ACAE Board may require the program to prepare an interim report due within a specified period of time not to exceed one year describing its compliance with the identified Standards. The timeline begins after receipt of the decision letter and Board Report from ACAE. If the ACAE Board has concerns about the educational effectiveness of the total program and thinks the program would benefit from an onsite visit in 2, 3, or 5 years, it will grant accreditation for a specific term.

Reaccreditation

An Accreditation classification that is awarded to a program every ten years, or earlier if determined by the ACAE Board of Directors. A program conducts a self-study evaluation similar to the one it followed in the accreditation process. A self-study document is submitted online, a virtual pre-site visit evaluation takes place, and the process culminates in a physical site visit to the academic program. The process follows the same steps outlined in this section above.

Probationary Accreditation

The issuance of Probationary Accreditation is a classification assigned to a program with major deficiencies or weaknesses with reference to the ACAE Standards. This classification indicates that the educational effectiveness of the program is in jeopardy. Programs with this classification will be required to submit regular progress reports, as determined by the ACAE Board of Directors, and shall undergo a full site evaluation within one year of being placed on probationary status. A program on Probation will have no more than two (2) years to remedy any identified areas on Non-Compliance (deficiencies or weaknesses) before the ACAE Board initiates an adverse accreditation action.

Denial of Accreditation

A classification assigned to new programs or other programs that neither comply with a substantial number of the ACAE Standards nor meet the requirements for ACAE accreditation. The program may reapply after a period of one year. The program has the opportunity to appeal the denial decision of the ACAE within 30 days after receiving its decision letter and Board Report and must follow the Appeal Procedures outlined in the Manual (see page 19, “Appeals Procedure”).

Additional Accreditation Categories

Voluntary Withdrawal from Accreditation

A classification assigned to a program that voluntarily withdraws its application at any time before a final decision is made. A written submission of its intention to withdraw from consideration will be submitted to the ACAE Executive Director. Any previously accredited program wishing to have its name removed from the ACAE list of accredited programs must notify the ACAE in writing. The ACAE Board of Directors will report that the program has voluntarily withdrawn its accreditation on its next annual listing of accredited programs.

Revocation of Accreditation

A classification assigned to accredited programs that no longer meet the ACAE Standards. The programs no longer retain an accredited status with the ACAE and will have its name removed from the ACAE list of accredited programs, but may reapply for accreditation again after a period of one year. The program has the opportunity to appeal the revocation decision of the ACAE within 30 days after receiving its decision letter and Board Report and must follow the Appeal Procedures outlined in the Manual (see page 19, “Appeals Procedure”).

Have Questions?

If you have any questions about the Accreditation Status process, please fill out the form below and a staff member will get back to you.