NCCA & ISO 17024: Professional Certification Standards

NCCA Accreditation Overview

The National Commission for Certifying Agencies (NCCA) operates as the accrediting body for professional certification programs in the United States and internationally. Established to maintain standards of excellence in professional and occupational certifications, NCCA accreditation represents one of the most rigorous credentialing processes available. For organizations developing evaluation certification programs, NCCA accreditation signals institutional commitment to quality, validity, and professional rigor.

NCCA accreditation applies to credential programs that assess professional competency. This includes certification examinations, professional designations, and competency-based credentials. When evaluators, quality engineers, or AI evaluation specialists pursue professional credentials, they often encounter NCCA-accredited programs. Understanding what this accreditation means—and how it differs from similar international standards—is essential for both credential-granting organizations and credential-holders.

The 18 NCCA Standards Explained

NCCA requires compliance with 18 rigorous standards. Let's examine each in detail, with specific implications for evaluation-focused certifications:

1. Mission and Governance

Organizations must articulate a clear mission for the credential program and establish governance structures that ensure fiduciary responsibility. For evaluation certifications, this means clearly defining what competencies the credential certifies, who makes decisions about the program, and how stakeholders participate in governance. The governance body should include credential-holders, employers, and independent subject matter experts.

2. Integrity of Credential

The credential must meaningfully assess professional competency in a specific domain. For AI evaluation, this requires demonstrating that certification holders possess defined evaluation competencies and that the credential provides meaningful differentiation in the labor market. Organizations must document that credential-holders are recognizably more competent than non-holders in evaluation practice.

3. Third-Party Assessment

NCCA requires independent third-party assessment of exam validity. This means hiring external psychometricians and evaluation experts—not just relying on internal expertise. These external reviewers examine test specifications, item quality, scoring procedures, and validity evidence. This external validation ensures objectivity and credibility.

4. Job Analysis

Organizations must conduct comprehensive job analyses documenting core competencies that the certification assesses. For evaluation credentials, this involves task analysis of what evaluation professionals actually do: designing metrics, conducting annotation, analyzing results, reporting findings, managing evaluation programs. The job analysis drives exam content and should be updated periodically.

5. Validity

NCCA requires evidence that the credential validly measures what it claims to measure. This includes content validity (does the exam cover the job domain comprehensively?), criterion validity (do credential-holders perform better on relevant job tasks?), and construct validity (does the credential measure meaningful professional attributes?). Evaluation programs must demonstrate these through research.

6. Reliability

Exam scores must be reliable—consistent across administrations and scorers. For certifications involving human judgment in scoring, this requires evidence of inter-rater reliability. Documentation of Cronbach's alpha, test-retest reliability, and scorer agreement metrics all contribute to demonstrating this standard.

7. Item Analysis and Maintenance

Items must be analyzed for difficulty, discrimination, and bias. Organizations must track item performance data, remove problematic items, and ensure the item bank remains current. For evaluation certifications with scenario-based items, this means regularly reviewing whether scenarios remain relevant to modern evaluation practice.

8. Passing Scores

Organizations must document the methodology for setting passing scores, using recognized standard-setting procedures (Angoff method, Bookmark method, etc.). The passing score must represent minimally competent professional practice—setting it too low undermines credential credibility; too high excludes qualified professionals. Documentation should justify the chosen cut score through stakeholder input.

9. Exam Security

NCCA mandates rigorous exam security. Organizations must protect test items from unauthorized access, prevent cheating, maintain secure testing environments, and have policies for exam integrity violations. For online evaluation certification exams, this requires proctoring, item banking security, and protocols for investigating suspected fraud.

10. Confidentiality and Data Privacy

Personal information about credential applicants and holders must be protected according to relevant privacy regulations. Organizations must document data retention policies, security measures, and who has access to candidate information. For international credentials, this includes compliance with GDPR and similar regulations.

11. Candidate Eligibility

Organizations must establish transparent, documented eligibility requirements. For evaluation credentials, this might include education level, work experience, or prerequisite competencies. Eligibility standards should be job-related and defensible; they cannot be arbitrary or discriminatory.

12. Candidate Support and Communications

Organizations must provide candidates with clear information about exam content, study materials, testing procedures, and how results are reported. This includes accessibility accommodations for candidates with disabilities. Communications should help candidates understand what the credential measures and whether it suits their career goals.

13. Accessibility and Accommodations

NCCA requires that accommodations be available for candidates with disabilities, documented in writing, and provided without undermining credential validity. This extends beyond physical accommodations to include extended time, large-print materials, and other modifications. Organizations must have policies for requesting and approving accommodations.

14. Exam Scoring and Reporting

Score reporting must be clear and meaningful. Organizations should provide scores, passing status, and context for understanding performance. Some organizations report score profiles showing performance across content domains. Score interpretations must be defensible and not misleading to employers or other stakeholders using credential information.

15. Recertification Requirements

NCCA expects credentials to maintain currency through recertification. Organizations must establish requirements for renewal—continuing education hours, periodic re-examination, or professional activity documentation. The recertification standards should ensure that credential-holders maintain competency throughout their careers.

16. Financial Stability and Transparency

Organizations must demonstrate financial sustainability. They should maintain audit statements, disclose fees, and document how revenue from credentialing programs is used. This ensures that programs can operate indefinitely and that resources support credential quality rather than excessive profit margins.

17. Discrimination-Free Practices

All credentialing practices must comply with civil rights laws and NCCA's non-discrimination policy. Exam content cannot disadvantage groups based on protected characteristics. Organizations must conduct bias review of items, ensure diverse standard-setting committees, and monitor credential-holder demographics to identify disparate impact.

18. Relationship with Sponsoring Organizations

If a credential is sponsored by an organization with economic or political interests, independence must be maintained in credentialing decisions. Governance should include independent voices not affiliated with any sponsoring body. This standard prevents situations where credential requirements are set to benefit specific employers or exclude competitors.

ISO 17024 Personnel Certification

ISO 17024 is the international standard for organizations that certify people. Unlike NCCA (which is specific to the United States), ISO 17024 applies globally and is recognized across most countries. Organizations pursuing international credential recognition often target ISO 17024 accreditation.

ISO 17024 Core Requirements

Independence: The certification body must be independent from organizations that employ credential-holders or provide training. This prevents conflicts of interest where an organization profits from both training and credentialing.

Competence of Personnel: Staff conducting certification decisions must be qualified. ISO 17024 requires documented competence of internal auditors, decision-makers, and assessors. Staff must receive training in relevant assessment methodologies and maintain their own professional development.

Impartiality: Certification decisions must be made impartially, without bias toward candidates or organizations. ISO 17024 requires policies preventing conflicts of interest—for example, assessors shouldn't evaluate colleagues or family members.

Assessment Methods: Assessment must be appropriate to the competencies being evaluated. ISO 17024 allows multiple approaches: written exams, practical demonstrations, portfolio review, or combinations. The chosen methods must have documented validity evidence.

Competency Requirements: Organizations must document what competencies credential-holders possess. ISO 17024 calls this the "competency standard." For evaluation certification, this includes defining evaluation competencies, describing how they're assessed, and explaining their relevance to professional practice.

Duration and Validity: Organizations must specify how long credentials are valid and what recertification or renewal requires. ISO 17024 expects periodic reassessment to ensure currency.

Recertification: Organizations must establish recertification requirements ensuring continued competency. Options include periodic re-examination, continuing education documentation, or demonstration of professional activity.

Appeals and Complaints: Organizations must have documented procedures for candidates to appeal unfavorable certification decisions and for stakeholders to raise complaints. Appeal procedures must be fair and independent.

ISO 17024 vs. NCCA: Key Differences

While both standards require rigorous assessment and ongoing monitoring, they differ in scope and application. NCCA is US-focused with specific requirements for standard-setting, psychometric analysis, and item analysis procedures. ISO 17024 is global and somewhat more flexible in assessment methodology, though equally rigorous in requiring competence validation.

Application Process & Timeline

NCCA Accreditation Application

The NCCA application process typically takes 12-18 months. Here's what to expect:

Phase 1: Pre-Application Planning (3-6 months)

Before formally applying, organizations should conduct a readiness assessment. NCCA recommends consulting with experienced accreditation specialists to identify gaps between current practice and NCCA standards. Common areas needing development include documentation of job analysis, validity evidence, and governance structure. Organizations should establish a project timeline and allocate budget (accreditation typically costs $10,000-30,000 in fees plus internal labor).

Phase 2: Prepare Documentation

Organizations must compile comprehensive documentation including the credential program structure, examination specifications, job analysis summary, validity evidence, reliability data, and governance documentation. Required documents typically include:

• Program mission and structure
• Job analysis documentation
• Exam specifications and item analysis data
• Validity and reliability studies
• Standard-setting methodology and results
• Governance policies and procedures
• Financial statements and fee documentation
• Compliance documentation for all 18 standards

Phase 3: Submit Application

The application is submitted to NCCA with all supporting documentation. NCCA staff conducts an initial completeness review. Organizations may be asked to clarify or expand documentation. This review phase typically lasts 4-8 weeks.

Phase 4: Expert Review (6-10 weeks)

NCCA assembles a review panel of external experts (typically 3-5 individuals with relevant expertise) who conduct detailed review of the application. The expert panel looks for evidence of compliance with all 18 standards, identifies strengths and areas needing improvement, and may submit detailed questions requiring responses from the applicant organization.

Phase 5: Site Visit

NCCA typically conducts an on-site visit to review operations, interview staff and governance leaders, and verify that practices match documentation. The site visit team may examine secured test items, review candidate files, and assess the credentialing operation's actual functioning. The visit report becomes part of the accreditation decision.

Phase 6: Commission Decision

The NCCA Commission (composed of representatives from various credentialing programs and the public) reviews the expert panel report and application materials and makes an accreditation decision. Possible outcomes include: full accreditation (5 years), provisional accreditation (with required remediation timeline), or denial. The Commission provides detailed feedback regardless of outcome.

ISO 17024 Accreditation Application

ISO 17024 accreditation is conducted by certification bodies operating under a national accreditation scheme (like ANAB in the US, UKAS in the UK, or DAkkS in Germany). The timeline is typically 6-12 months:

Phase 1: Selection of Accreditor

Organizations identify an accreditation body recognized by the national accreditation scheme. Different certifiers may specialize in different credential types, and reputation matters for credibility.

Phase 2: Preliminary Assessment (optional)

Many organizations request a preliminary gap assessment to identify areas needing development before formal application. This can accelerate the formal process.

Phase 3: Documentation Submission

Organizations prepare and submit documentation covering competency standards, assessment procedures, governance, appeals processes, and quality management documentation. ISO 17024 requires less documentation than NCCA but still substantial evidence.

Phase 4: Assessment Visit

The accreditor conducts an assessment visit, typically 2-3 days for a basic credential program. The assessor reviews operations, interviews staff, and verifies compliance with ISO 17024 requirements. For organizations with multiple credentials, larger sites, or complex operations, the assessment may take longer.

Phase 5: Decision and Potential Conditions

The accreditor issues a decision: accreditation granted, accreditation with conditions (deficiencies must be addressed within a specified timeframe), or accreditation denied. ISO 17024 accreditation is typically valid for 3 years, after which organizations must undergo reassessment.

Maintaining Your Accreditation

NCCA Maintenance Requirements

Annual Reporting: Accredited organizations must submit annual reports documenting candidates tested, exam administration statistics, score distributions, and any significant changes to the program. NCCA monitors these reports for indicators of quality drift.

Periodic Reviews: NCCA conducts focused reviews every 2-3 years examining specific standards or areas. Organizations might receive letters requesting documentation of recent validity studies, updated job analyses, or governance changes.

Surveillance Audits: Unannounced or scheduled surveillance audits may occur to verify ongoing compliance. These audits examine records, interview staff, and observe exam administration procedures. Organizations must maintain documentation capacity to support these audits.

Reaccreditation: Every 5 years, organizations must undergo comprehensive reaccreditation review, similar to initial accreditation. This includes updated documentation, expert panel review, and site visit. Reaccreditation allows NCCA to verify that standards have been maintained and that the credential remains current.

Reporting Changes: Organizations must notify NCCA of material changes: significant exam modifications, governance changes, ownership changes, or changes affecting candidate eligibility. NCCA evaluates whether changes require additional documentation or modification to accreditation status.

ISO 17024 Maintenance Requirements

Surveillance Audits: ISO 17024 requires surveillance audits every 6-12 months between full reassessments. These audits may be conducted on-site or desk-based, examining samples of certification decisions, records, and procedures.

Quality Management: Organizations must maintain quality management systems documenting processes, corrective actions, and internal audits. Quality records are reviewed during surveillance audits.

Reassessment: Every 3 years, organizations undergo full reassessment (similar to initial accreditation). This involves re-documentation of standards, site visit, and updated assessment of all requirements.

The Business Case for Accreditation

Employer Trust and Labor Market Value

When organizations accredit their credentials, employers recognize that the credential represents rigorously validated competency. Accredited credentials command premium recognition in the labor market. Evaluation professionals holding NCCA or ISO 17024 accredited credentials demonstrate commitment to standardized professional practice and validated competency.

Research on professional credentials shows that NCCA and ISO 17024 accreditation correlates with employer recognition and credential value. Employers prefer hiring professionals who hold accredited credentials, recognizing that accreditation provides assurance of quality assessment and meaningful skill differentiation.

Regulatory Recognition and Credibility

Some professional fields require or strongly prefer accredited credentials. Accreditation demonstrates compliance with professional standards and provides defensibility if the credential is ever challenged. In regulated industries (healthcare, financial services, etc.), accredited credentials provide additional assurance to regulators.

International Reciprocity

ISO 17024 accreditation facilitates international recognition of credentials. An ISO 17024 accredited credential in one country is more likely to be recognized in another country, enabling credential portability. This is particularly valuable for credentials intended to have global applicability.

Risk Mitigation

Accreditation provides legal and operational risk mitigation. Should a credential ever face legal challenge, accreditation demonstrates that assessment practices comply with recognized professional standards and that the organization took reasonable steps to ensure validity and fairness. This defensibility is valuable insurance.

Program Evolution and Maturity

Accreditation signals that an organization has invested in program maturity. Accredited credentials attract more serious candidates, justify higher credential fees, and support marketing positioning as a quality provider. Accreditation also signals to employers that the organization takes credential quality seriously.

NCCA vs ISO 17024: Comparison

Dimension	NCCA	ISO 17024
Geographic Scope	United States primary; international recognized	Global; applies in 120+ countries
Standards	18 specific standards	7 principal requirements (more flexible)
Job Analysis	Required; comprehensive documentation	Required; less prescriptive methodology
Validity Evidence	Specific psychometric requirements	Required; flexible in approach
Accreditation Duration	5 years	3 years
Re-accreditation Frequency	Every 5 years	Every 3 years
Surveillance Audits	Periodic (every 2-3 years)	Regular (every 6-12 months)
Assessment Flexibility	Exam-based; flexible item types	Multiple assessment methods allowed
Cost	$10,000-30,000 for accreditation	$8,000-25,000 for accreditation
Recognition by Employers	Strong in US; recognized internationally	Strongest globally; essential internationally

Organizations with Accreditations

NCCA-Accredited Credential Programs

Project Management Institute (PMI): PMI's Project Management Professional (PMP) is NCCA-accredited, making it the gold standard in project management credentialing. PMI conducts regular job analyses and maintains extensive validity evidence for the PMP exam.

American Society of Quality (ASQ): ASQ's Certified Quality Engineer (CQE), Certified Software Quality Engineer (CSQE), and other quality-focused credentials are NCCA-accredited. ASQ has pioneered quality credential standards and maintains rigorous accreditation status.

Human Resources Certification Institute (HRCI): HRCI's HR certification programs (PHR, SHRM-CP, etc.) are NCCA-accredited, establishing standards for human resources professional competency.

Certified Financial Planner Board: The CFP credential is NCCA-accredited and represents the highest standards in financial planning. The CFP board maintains rigorous ethical and competency standards in alignment with NCCA requirements.

ISO 17024-Accredited Programs

International Project Management Association (IPMA): IPMA's credential programs are ISO 17024-accredited, facilitating international project management credential recognition.

AWS Certification Program: Amazon Web Services' certification programs have pursued ISO 17024 accreditation for their technical credentials, enhancing international recognition.

Lean Six Sigma Certification Providers: Leading Lean Six Sigma providers worldwide have achieved ISO 17024 accreditation, standardizing quality improvement competency assessment globally.

What This Means for Evaluators

As evaluation becomes increasingly professionalized, we're seeing movement toward accredited evaluation credentials. Organizations developing evaluation certification programs should view NCCA or ISO 17024 accreditation as a strategic goal. For evaluation professionals seeking credentials, prioritizing accredited programs provides assurance that the credential represents validated competency and has employer recognition.