Francis Neric, M.S., MBA |
Nov.
20, 2024
Academic accreditation is a process designed to protect students and the public by ensuring that educational institutions and programs meet established quality standards and promote consistency and excellence in education. Academic accreditation also ensures accountability in delivering an education that effectively prepares students for their professional careers. There are two main types of academic accreditation: “institutional accreditation” assesses the quality of an entire institution, and “programmatic accreditation” evaluates the effectiveness of academic programs to adequately prepare students for a targeted professional role.
Programmatic accreditation is the cornerstone of the ACSM Committee on Certification and Registry Boards’ advocacy and outreach efforts. It provides assurances that accredited exercise science programs are capable of preparing students to deliver high-quality, evidence-based care consistently and at scale. ACSM as a whole, and the ACSM Committee on Certification and Registry Boards (CCRB) in particular, aims to position its registered exercise professionals as invaluable members of interdisciplinary health care teams. These efforts align directly with ACSM’s vision to “extend and enrich lives through the power of movement” and its mission to “educate and empower professionals to advance the science and practice of health and human performance.”
Understanding Academic Accreditation Types
Programmatic accreditation — of which there are 63 recognized by CHEA — on the other hand, is targeted at specific academic programs within an institution. It ensures that these programs meet professional standards that adequately prepare graduates for specific job roles. Programmatic accreditation provides assurance that students gain both the theoretical knowledge and practical skills required for success in their chosen field. This type of accreditation is essential across disciplines — whether in health care, engineering, business, education or any other high stakes and outcomes-based endeavor — as it helps ensure that graduates are fully prepared to meet industry expectations, adhere to professional standards and contribute effectively to their field. Programmatic accreditation ultimately helps maintain the integrity of specific professions, builds public trust and improves overall workforce readiness by ensuring that programs produce capable professionals.
Programmatic Accreditation in the Exercise Sciences
The Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP) and the Committee on Accreditation for the Exercise Sciences (CoAES) play pivotal roles in accrediting undergraduate exercise science and graduate exercise physiology programs. CAAHEP is one of the largest accrediting bodies in the health sciences field, and it accredits educational programs that prepare students to enter allied health careers. CAAHEP is recognized by CHEA, the only nongovernmental higher education organization in the United States that awards recognition to institutional and programmatic accrediting organizations. CAAHEP and CoAES establish the Standards and Guidelines for the Accreditation of Educational Programs in Exercise Science and Exercise Physiology to assure that graduates are capable of meeting the professional demands of the profession.
Alignment of CAAHEP Accreditation with ACSM Certification Competencies
CAAHEP’s exercise science and exercise physiology standards strongly align with the professional competencies outlined in ACSM’s certification content for ACSM Certified Exercise Physiologist® (ACSM-EP) and ACSM Certified Clinical Exercise Physiologist® (ACSM-CEP) certifications. Core domains such as health assessment, exercise testing, exercise prescription and behavior modification reflect the competencies requiring a graduate degree that exercise physiologists and clinical exercise physiologists must possess to effectively serve patients and clients. CAAHEP-accredited programs must provide curricula that prepare graduates to meet the demands of the field. In addition, the accreditation standards emphasize the development of client communication skills, adherence to professional ethics and practical, evidence-based application of exercise interventions.
Exercise Science. CAAHEP’s exercise science standards are largely aligned with the competencies of an exercise physiologist, requiring a bachelor’s degree. CAAHEP accreditation guidelines ensure that exercise science programs include comprehensive training in health and fitness assessment, exercise prescription and implementation, and behavior change that align strongly with the ACSM-EP performance domains. However, there are areas where alignment is partially covered, which include the integration of advanced behavior modification techniques and emerging technologies in fitness assessment. The CAAHEP and ACSM-EP alignment provides individuals graduating from these programs with a solid foundation to perform competently in the health fitness field, although some may require additional training to fully meet all competencies.
Exercise Physiology. CAAHEP’s standards for exercise physiology (clinical track) align with most competencies of a clinical exercise physiologist. CAAHEP-accredited clinical exercise physiology standards emphasize training in patient assessment, exercise testing, prescription and the use of exercise as a therapeutic modality that closely correspond to those outlined in the ACSM-CEP content outline. However, certain areas, such as advanced clinical skills and specialized patient populations, may be partially covered, indicating that graduates may need additional training and experience to fully meet all competencies of an entry level clinical exercise physiologist. The strong alignment between CAAHEP exercise physiology standards and ACSM-CEP knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) ensures that graduates are well prepared to provide safe and effective exercise interventions in clinical environments.
The CCRB adopted the requirement for CAAHEP accreditation for the ACSM Certified Exercise Physiologist® (ACSM-EP) and ACSM Certified Clinical Exercise Physiologist® (ACSM-CEP) certifications in 2020 due to the substantial overlap of professional competencies and educational standards. This requirement is intended to standardize and elevate the quality of education in the field by ensuring that educational programs align closely with the professional standards expected of exercise professionals. The implementation, scheduled for August 2027, provides academic programs with ample time to achieve compliance with the accreditation standards. This strategic decision aims to promote the integration of exercise physiologists and clinical exercise physiologists within health care teams.
Alternative Accreditation Standards and ACSM Certification KSAs
While the CCRB identified CAAHEP-accredited exercise science and exercise physiology programs and prefers it as its primary pathway to its degreed certifications, it recognizes that other accreditation pathways exist or may emerge. As such, provisions have been created for alternative pathways to programmatic accreditation to allow academic institutions to demonstrate that their exercise science and exercise physiology programs still meet the required professional standards for ACSM certification. These alternative pathways provide flexibility for institutions while maintaining ACSM’s commitment to high-quality education and competency in the exercise profession.
Exercise & Sports Science Australia. Exercise & Sports Science Australia (ESSA) was founded in 1991 and serves as the national professional association and accrediting body for exercise and sports science in Australia. Its primary purpose is to promote and support research, education, and professional practice in exercise and sports science, ensuring that accredited programs maintain high standards in exercise prescription, health assessment and professional practice. ESSA offers several types of accreditations, including “exercise scientist,” “exercise physiologist” and “sports scientist,” each catering to different professional roles within the exercise and sports science industry.
Council on Accreditation of Strength and Conditioning Education. The NSCA’s Council on Accreditation of Strength and Conditioning Education (CASCE) was established by the NSCA in 2021 to provide accreditation for strength and conditioning programs in North America. CASCE's mission is to ensure that educational programs adequately prepare students for professional roles in strength and conditioning, emphasizing the knowledge, skills and competencies needed to work within multidisciplinary health care teams. CASCE was founded to meet the growing demand for standardized education in the strength and conditioning field, and it supports the eligibility requirement for the Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist® (CSCS®) certification, which, starting in 2030, will require candidates to graduate from an NSCA-approved accredited program. This change is intended to ensure that strength and conditioning professionals enter the field with consistent baseline KSAs necessary to serve clients effectively and safely.
Crosswalking Professional Competencies with CAAHEP, ESSA and CASCE Standards
This section explores the appropriateness of programmatic accreditation for meeting the professional competencies established in the ACSM-EP and ACSM-CEP certification programs. Accreditation from organizations such as CAAHEP, ESSA and CASCE serves as a quality assurance mechanism, ensuring that students are trained in line with industry expectations. The ACSM-EP and ACSM-CEP certifications demand competencies in areas like health assessment, exercise prescription and clinical interventions, and alignment with accreditation standards ensures that graduates are prepared to meet these professional demands effectively. Alignment is crucial for providing safe, effective and evidence-based care for clients and patients.
Applying Programmatic Accreditation to the Exercise Physiologist. A comparison of the ACSM-EP competencies against the CAAHEP exercise science, ESSA Accredited Exercise Scientist (AES), and CASCE standards highlights the varying degrees of alignment across accrediting bodies. CAAHEP exercise science standards provide a broad alignment that covers essential domains like health assessment, exercise prescription and professional collaboration, and ESSA AES focuses on areas such as health assessment and working with special populations. CASCE, on the other hand, emphasizes strength and conditioning competencies, with a narrower focus on athletic performance. See Table 1 for a comparison of KSAs to the respective programmatic standards.
Table 1 | ACSM-EP KSAs Against CAAHEP Exercise Science, ESSA AES and CASCE Standards
| | | |
Health & Fitness Assessment | | | Deficient — Focuses primarily on athletic assessments and lacks in comprehensive health screenings |
Exercise Prescription & Program Design | | Partial — Covers exercise prescription but less focus on chronic conditions | Deficient — Limited to strength and conditioning programs for athletes |
| | | Partial — Focuses on physiology for athletic performance and lacks clinical applications |
Behavior Change & Counseling | | | Deficient — Primarily addresses motivation strategies for athletes |
Risk Management & Professional Responsibility | | | Partial — Emphasis on gym and equipment safety; lacks broader risk management |
Clinical Exercise Knowledge | | Partial — Covers clinical exercise for certain populations but limited for advanced chronic conditions | Deficient — Limited clinical focus, primarily oriented towards healthy athletes |
Special Populations (i.e., stable diseases and conditions) | | | Deficient — Limited focus on nonathletic populations |
Biomechanics & Movement Analysis | Partial — Covers functional anatomy but with less emphasis on performance biomechanics | | |
| Partial — Provides basic nutrition knowledge relevant to health | Partial — Covers general nutrition but lacks clinical dietary applications | Deficient — No coverage of nutrition knowledge |
Technology & Data Analysis | Partial — Introduces data collection but lacks integration for broad health applications | Partial — Includes data analysis and tech applications for exercise science but limited in health settings | Deficient — Emphasis on performance tracking only |
Professional Collaboration | | | Deficient — Limited focus on interdisciplinary collaboration |
ACSM-EP KSAs and CAAHEP Exercise Science Standards: The CAAHEP exercise science standards offer a strong alignment with ACSM-EP KSAs that covers a broad scope of competencies necessary for exercise physiologists. CAAHEP standards include comprehensive health and fitness assessment, exercise prescription for diverse populations, in-depth exercise physiology, behavior change support, and professional collaboration across health care settings. While the standards are generally well aligned, CAAHEP provides only partial alignment in areas such as biomechanics, nutrition and technology/data analysis. Overall, the CAAHEP exercise science standards and guidelines are well suited to prepare students for the holistic requirements of the ACSM-EP certification.
ACSM-EP KSAs and ESSA AES Standards: The ESSA AES accreditation aligns strongly with ACSM-EP competencies, especially in areas such as health assessments, exercise physiology and working with special populations. ESSA standards also emphasize behavior change, risk management and professional collaboration in health care, equipping graduates with critical skills for various health and fitness roles. However, ESSA provides only partial alignment in clinical exercise for chronic conditions and advanced nutrition applications, as these standards are primarily oriented towards health and wellness rather than clinical rehabilitation. ESSA standards also partially cover technology and data analysis for exercise science applications. Overall, the ESSA AES accreditation is well-suited for preparing students for exercise physiology roles.
ACSM-EP KSAs and CASCE Standards: The CASCE accreditation is primarily focused on strength and conditioning education, with an emphasis on athletic performance and training optimization. CASCE standards align with ACSM-EP competencies in areas such as biomechanics and movement analysis. However, CASCE is deficient in critical ACSM-EP areas, including clinical exercise knowledge, health assessments, and behavior change for general populations that are essential for working in diverse health and fitness roles. The program has limited emphasis on risk management beyond athletic contexts and lacks substantial coverage in professional collaboration and interdisciplinary health care. CASCE’s accreditation is best suited for careers in athletic development rather than the broader health-focused competencies required for ACSM-EP certification.
Applying Programmatic Accreditation to the Clinical Exercise Physiologist: A comparison of the ACSM-CEP competencies against the CAAHEP clinical exercise physiology, ESSA Accredited Exercise Physiologist (AEP), and CASCE standards highlight the varying degrees of alignment across accrediting bodies. CAAHEP clinical exercise physiology standards provide a strong alignment that covers essential domains such as patient assessment, exercise prescription and clinical interventions, all of which are critical for preparing clinical exercise physiologists. The ESSA AEP standards also show substantial alignment, particularly in clinical skills, health assessment and exercise interventions for stable chronic conditions. However, ESSA standards provide only partial alignment in advanced clinical training and specialized applications for complex cases. In contrast, CASCE standards focus predominantly on strength and conditioning education, with an emphasis on sport performance. CASCE’s standards show limited alignment with the broader clinical competencies required by ACSM-CEP certification, particularly in areas such as patient assessment, chronic disease management and interdisciplinary collaboration. See Table 2 for a detailed comparison of content domains and KSAs for the respective programmatic standards.
Table 2 | Applying ACSM-CEP KSAs Against CAAHEP Exercise Physiologist (Clinical Track), ESSA AEP and CASCE Standards
| | | |
Health & Fitness Assessment | | | Deficient — Primarily focused on athletic assessments; lacking comprehensive health screenings |
Exercise Prescription & Program Design | | | Deficient — Limited to strength and conditioning programs for athletes; lacks clinical exercise prescription |
| | | Partial — Focuses on physiology for athletic performance; lacks clinical applications |
Behavior Change & Counseling | | | Deficient — Primarily addresses motivation strategies for athletes; lacks clinical behavior change support |
Risk Management & Professional Responsibility | | | Partial — Emphasizes gym/equipment safety but lacks broader risk management for clinical populations |
Clinical Exercise Knowledge | | | Deficient — Limited to athletic focus; lacks clinical knowledge for disease management |
Special Populations (e.g., Older Adults) | | | Deficient — Primarily targets athletes; limited focus on nonathletic or clinical populations |
Biomechanics & Movement Analysis | Partial — Covers functional anatomy; less emphasis on advanced performance biomechanics | | |
| Partial — Provides basic nutrition knowledge relevant to health | Partial — Covers general nutrition but lacks clinical dietary applications | Deficient — No coverage of nutrition relevant to clinical populations |
Technology & Data Analysis | Partial — Introduces data collection but lacks clinical health applications | Partial — Includes data analysis and tech applications for exercise science | Deficient — Emphasis on performance tracking only; lacks application to clinical health data |
Professional Collaboration | | | Deficient — Limited focus on interdisciplinary collaboration, mostly centered on athletic performance |
ACSM-CEP KSAs and CAAHEP Exercise Physiologist (Clinical Track) Standards: CAAHEP clinical exercise physiology standards align well with ACSM-CEP competencies, covering comprehensive health assessments, exercise prescription for clinical populations, exercise physiology and behavior change. CAAHEP standards partially align in biomechanics, nutrition and technology/data analysis, where coverage is foundational. Overall, CAAHEP standards are well suited for preparing students for ACSM-CEP requirements, particularly in clinical and health-focused roles.
ACSM-CEP KSAs and ESSA AEP Standards: ESSA AEP strongly aligns with ACSM-CEP competencies, especially in health assessments, clinical exercise knowledge and behavior change. ESSA standards also emphasize risk management and collaboration, equipping graduates for diverse health and fitness roles. However, ESSA provides only partial alignment in nutrition and technology/data analysis, where standards are primarily health oriented but less clinically comprehensive. Overall, ESSA AEP standards prepare students for clinical exercise physiology but with some limitations in advanced clinical nutrition and technology.
ACSM-CEP KSAs and CASCE Standards: Primarily focused on strength and conditioning education, CASCE shows deficiencies in critical ACSM-CEP areas, including health assessments, clinical exercise knowledge and behavior change for general populations. CASCE’s limited risk management, special populations and professional collaboration emphasis makes it less suitable for health-focused roles required by ACSM-CEP. CASCE standards are best suited for strength and conditioning in athletic settings rather than broader clinical roles.
Advocacy of Qualified Exercise Professionals in Health Care
The CCRB’s adoption of the programmatic accreditation requirement for ACSM-EP and ACSM-CEP certifications exemplifies its commitment to standardizing and elevating educational quality across the field. The integration of programmatic accreditation not only assures the preparedness of future exercise physiologists and clinical exercise physiologists but also enhances the credibility of the profession and fosters greater trust and collaboration within interdisciplinary health care teams. CAAHEP’s exercise science and exercise physiology (clinical track) standards align closely with professional expectations of the ACSM-EP and ACSM-CEP. However, the CCRB recognizes that alternative pathways for accreditation may exist or emerge in the future. By providing multiple accreditation routes, the CCRB ensures that a diverse range of educational programs can meet the high standards required for certification.
Programmatic accreditation is a cornerstone of professionalism in occupational credentialing. The CCRB seeks to gain respect, trust and professional recognition by adjacent health occupations and health care administrators. The key to this effort is the ability to draw parallels between registered exercise physiologists and clinical exercise physiologists to registered health care professionals, such as registered nurses (RNs) and registered dietitians (RDs). Just as RNs and RDs achieve recognition through accredited education (i.e., CAPTE, CCNE, ACEN) and professional certification, ACSM-credentialed exercise professionals must also adhere to rigorous standards to promote professional credibility and high-quality patient care.
Francis Neric, M.S., MBA, currently serves as the associate vice president of certification and credentialing at the American College of Sports Medicine® (ACSM). With professional credentialing experience spanning 16 years, Francis has been instrumental in leading strategic initiatives to enhance the certification, advanced certificate and exam preparation programs to meet the needs of the domestic and international stakeholders of ACSM. Francis holds an MBA in business management from the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs; an M.S. in clinical exercise physiology from California State University, Fullerton; and a B.S. in exercise science from California State University, Long Beach. Francis combines academic and industry knowledge to drive innovation and excellence in the health fitness industry. Francis is a passionate advocate for raising the bar for professionalism in the health fitness industry and expanding opportunities for exercise professionals in health care.