Covid-19 Special Report Quantitative Data Summary
CACREP thanks all program liaisons who completed the mandatory Covid-19 Special Report; shared the submitted information with all appropriate parties within your respective institutions; and secured the additional affirmation by your designated institution or program administrator. The Special Report serves to memorialize the specific impact that the COVID-19 pandemic had on each program and the accommodations that have been made in order to continue program operations while remaining in compliance with CACREP standards and policies. This Special Report is now part of each program’s accreditation record with CACREP. Programs that have not submitted this mandatory report now have a gap in their record with CACREP and have forfeited any future Covid-related considerations with regards to compliance with CACREP standards.
CACREP conducted a quantitative analysis of the reports submitted and a qualitative analysis is underway. The outcomes of both these analyses will inform the CACREP Board’s post-pandemic decision-making regarding all deviations made by programs. The Board is currently developing guidance for programs regarding permanent changes that are being considered since the last accreditation of the program. Programs will have to submit a report, either a Substantive Change or an Abbreviated Self-study that could include a site visit, depending on the scope of the change.
The quantitative analysis revealed that programs were pre-dominantly successful remaining in compliance with most of the CACREP standards and policies. There were a few Standards and Policies that were more greatly impacted.
A review of all the Standards revealed, for:
Section 1 – Learning environment affected about 30% of reporting programs in Standard I – The institution provides adequate and appropriate access to counseling instruction environments (on or off campus) that are conducive to training and supervision of individual and group counseling. The counseling instruction environments include technologies and other observational capabilities as well as procedures for maintaining privacy and confidentiality.
Section 2 – Professional Identity there are no standards that affected more than 30% of reporting programs.
Section 3 – Professional Practice affected about 85% of reporting programs in three standards: Standard G – Practicum students complete at least 40 clock hours of direct service with actual clients that contributes to the development of counseling skills; Standard J – After successful completion of the practicum, students complete 600 clock hours of supervised counseling internship in roles and settings with clients relevant to their specialty area; and Standard K – Internship students complete at least 240 clock hours of direct service. There were no other standards that affected more than 30% of reporting programs.
Section 4 – Evaluation of Programs and Students there are no standards that affected more than 10% of reporting programs.
Specialty Standards there are no standards that affected more than 1% of reporting programs.
Doctoral Program: Learning Environment there are no standards that affected more than 3% of reporting programs; Professional Identity there are no standards that affected more than 5% of reporting programs; Practicum and Internship there are no standards that affected more than 8% of reporting programs.
A review of the selected policies revealed, for:
Policy 1 – Governing Pre-Application and Review Stages affected about 98% of reporting programs in the following policies:
- When CACREP Standards Conflict with State/Local Laws
- Programs Offered at Multiple Sites
- Programs Offered by Multiple Delivery Methods
Policy 2 – Governing Timelines and Policy 8 – Governing Program Changes Mid-Cycle affected about 15% of reporting programs across these policies.
Policy 9 – Governing International Programs affected about1% of reporting programs.
Policy 10 – Governing Transition to New Standards affected about 4% of reporting programs.