Peer Review Committee

The purpose of the Peer-Review Committee is to recruit, develop, and support the peer-review volunteer corps of the Commission to perform comprehensive programmatic reviews, including self-study reviews and on-site visitations, for all program levels (professional, post-professional, and residency/fellowship) for both quality assurance and quality improvement purposes.

Committee Members:

  • Todd Neuharth, MA, ATC (Chair)
  • Jolene Henning, EdD, ATC
  • Kelley Henderson, EdD, ATC
  • Ryan Krzyzanowicz, DAT, ATC
  • Amanda Benson, PhD, ATC
  • Dani Moffit, PhD, ATC
  • Shawn Felton, EdD, ATC
  • Mark Laursen, MS, ATC
  • Scott Heinerichs, EdD, ATC

Duties, Roles and Responsibilities:

  1. Collaborate with the board to develop and implement a board approved philosophy statement regarding the Commission’s commitment to the dual quality assurance and quality improvement accreditation processes.
  2. Conduct appropriate training and development of volunteers for best practices in accreditation peer-review that is consistent with Commission philosophy, policies, and procedures.
  3. Recommend to the board changes to Commission accreditation philosophy, and policies and procedures, as appropriate and consistent with peer-review best practices (e.g., peer-review teams, peer-reviewer feedback).
  4. Facilitate the recruitment, development, and maintenance of a competent corps of diverse volunteers to serve as peer-reviewers to conduct comprehensive reviews including self-study reviews and on-site visits.
  5. Study and recommend the optimal capacity for carrying out high quality peer-review trainings and subsequent comprehensive reviews based on the numbers of available high quality peer-reviewers.
  6. Develop a calendar for peer-reviewer development and conducting comprehensive programmatic reviews that is predicated on the requirement that all peer-reviewers be well trained and capable of conducting high quality comprehensive reviews.
  7. Propose an annual budget that includes funding for peer-reviewer development and conducting the requisite number of comprehensive reviews annually.
  8. Explore and recommend the appropriate potential use of virtual site visits for items such as interim reports.
  9. Monitor information from the Association of Specialized and Professional Accreditors (ASPA) regarding contemporary issues and best practices in higher education peer-review for comprehensive program evaluations.
  10. Assure that all recommended policies, procedures, and practices under the purview of the Peer-Review Committee are compliant with the current Commission on Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) recognition standards.

Committee Announcements:

(coming soon)