Accredited programs at all levels of training must provide public-facing training outcomes and program information to facilitate transparency and informed decision making on behalf of applicants. These disclosure requirements are fully described in Implementing Regulations (IRs) C-26 D, C-27 I and C-23 P. While public disclosure requirements have been in place for doctoral programs for some time, those for accredited internship and postdoctoral programs came into effect in 2017 with the advent of the Standards of Accreditation. Programs’ data were formally reviewed by the Office of Program Consultation and Accreditation for the first time in 2018, and the feedback produced by that review generated many questions from training directors and others. This article describes the public disclosure review process and addresses some frequently-cited items.
The review process
Program public disclosure data must be submitted and are reviewed by the office in accordance with the following schedule:
| Level of training | Programs must submit by | Feedback from office by |
| Doctoral programs (IR C-26 D) | Oct. 1 | Spring |
| Internship programs (IR C-27 I) | Sept. 1 | Spring/summer |
| Postdoctoral programs (IR C-23 P) | Dec. 1 | Spring/summer |
The office collects links to public disclosure information from the CoA Portal and reviews that content in accordance with the specifications of the implementing regulations. Data tables are reviewed for completeness and consistency with the required templates; the office does not review the specific content of the tables (e.g., stipend amounts). Programs are encouraged to ensure that figures presented in public disclosure data map onto those provided in the Annual Report Online and in other submissions (e.g., self-studies, reporting requirement responses); however, these different data sources are not reviewed in conjunction with one another and consistency between the data is not verified in the review of public disclosure information.
Tips and frequently cited errors
The following items were amassed based on questions and comments received since the office’s most recent round of public disclosure data review:
- Titling public disclosure: The IRs for all levels of training identify specific title requirements for programs’ public disclosure presentations. These titles must be used in unaltered formats, as follows:
o Doctoral data must be titled “Student Admissions, Outcomes, and Other Data.”
o Internship data must be titled “Internship Admissions, Support, and Initial Placement Data.”
o Postdoctoral data must be titled “Postdoctoral Residency Admissions, Support, and Initial Placement Data”.
- Table formatting: Programs are not to modify the format of required tables in a manner that would alter the content required by the implementing regulations. No content should be added, and no other modifications should be made beyond resizing tables to fit a program’s available display space. Standardization of these tables both facilitates the office’s review and allows students and trainees to compare accredited programs more effectively and efficiently.
- Completeness: Programs should not leave fields in the tables blank, as blank fields generate additional feedback for programs to respond to in the review process.
Programs are encouraged to use the preparation sheets available on the commission’s website as they prepare public disclosure information for display. Additional questions about public disclosure data and the associated implementing regulations should be referred to the Office of Program Consultation and Accreditation.
